Post by: SixthAngel on January 14, 2007, 03:31:25 PM
Why would anyone get this besides the fact that they are forced to? I don't see it offering anything I want that xp isn't currently giving me. Microsoft making direct x10 only work on Vista seems to be there way to force it even more then making computer makers use it. If I had an up to date computer I would rather play new games with xp because you know they will support it for quite a long time.
Post by: Blue Plant on January 14, 2007, 03:46:53 PM
Madness. Niche pricing for a dominant mainstream OS doesn't make sense to me.
Post by: Kairon on January 14, 2007, 04:38:26 PM
OH WHAT JOY! WHAT PROGRESS!
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Shecky on January 14, 2007, 04:51:37 PM
There is only two reasons I have ever run a Windows operating system...
1) "PC" Games
2) Special Drivers - often commonly associated with my laptop, which will not suspend correctly with BSD or Linux.
Post by: MarioAllStar on January 14, 2007, 04:58:35 PM
Luckily, I am not into PC gaming and only boot into Windows 2000 for homework or multimedia.
Post by: capamerica on January 14, 2007, 05:03:24 PM
I've been "trying" to beta test it and the OS is such a resource hog that it brings most of my systems down to a crawl. Which is funny cause according to MS compatibility tester for Vista my computers should all be fine for running Vista. I am an Official beta tester for Vista and Office '07. Office is pretty nice and I'm almost willing to say its worth upgrading that. But Vista you should stay FAR away.
The only system I own that can sort of run Vista is my 3Ghz AMD64 with 1.5GB of RAM and a 256MB PCI-e Video card. And even then it runs pretty shitty.
My work computer which is a 1.5Ghz AMD XP with 512MB of RAM and a 128MB AGP video card barely can handle it, it takes about 5 mins to open notepad.
The OS is a serious joke and very very very few people are going to upgrade. Its going to cost people almost the same price of the OS (most likely more) just to updated their computers to handle it.
On top of that I'm finding that alot of my games are incompatible with Vista. Yes thats right incompatible. When I go to run a game like Albatross18 it tells me that I can't run this program cause its a security risk and won't let me play it. What kind of BS is that? Seriously. In order to play any old games the developers are going to have to go back and make a new executable that is compatible with Vista. This is going to be a serious nightmare to any companies who have in house made software or are using old programs that are no longer supported.
Just stay with XP and don't upgrade to Vista, infact if you buy a PC with Vista installed on it downgrade back to XP. It will save you from so many headaches.
Post by: Nick DiMola on January 14, 2007, 06:17:11 PM
Post by: Kairon on January 14, 2007, 06:34:23 PM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Smoke39 on January 14, 2007, 07:16:50 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 14, 2007, 08:00:13 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 14, 2007, 08:43:04 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 15, 2007, 01:05:14 AM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on January 15, 2007, 02:15:35 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 15, 2007, 02:22:14 AM
Video-decellerated desktop
Post by: MaryJane on January 15, 2007, 03:36:07 AM
Post by: segagamer12 on January 15, 2007, 04:34:40 AM
Post by: Caliban on January 15, 2007, 05:15:26 AM
Post by: Shecky on January 15, 2007, 05:39:54 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
Luckily I will be getting Vista from my school for 10$ (not the stupid home version either) because of student discounts!
On my last count pain and suffering isn't free.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 15, 2007, 05:55:00 AM
That's pretty much what I've been saying since Windows 95. I honestly have not seen much use for the newer versions of Windows. But I'm sure there are some major behind-the-scenes security and bug fixes that do make it more worthwhile. To me XP is just that Windows OS that made all my old games stop working but I had to get because I couldn't get a new PC without it.
But then I still use Office 97 and see no reason to upgrade so I don't know if I'm in the norm here. I also have reached a point where aside from a bigger hard drive (which I can get externally) I personally see no need to upgrade my PC ever again. It finally hit a point where I'm completely content and have no desire for a better machine.
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on January 15, 2007, 07:39:54 AM
And even then, I'll probably have a dual-boot of Linux for everything besides games.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 15, 2007, 08:14:48 AM
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on January 15, 2007, 02:08:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
You can be pretty damn sure that dx10 won't be ported to 2k. They're relying heavily on the low-level behaviour of Vista for this.
That' what I'm afraid of, but there's always the chance someone will find a way to make it run with 2k.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 15, 2007, 11:21:01 PM
Post by: ThePerm on January 16, 2007, 03:51:50 AM
Post by: Nephilim on January 16, 2007, 05:23:04 AM
so many articals lied about xp and its ram useage, yet people are falling for it again with vista
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 16, 2007, 05:31:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
im still using windows 98
We must keep our brotherhood alive.
Windows Vista: THE FULLY DRM-COMPLIANT(INFECTED) OPERATING SYSTEM FOR THE HIGH-DEF AUDIO/VIDEO CONTENT ERA. REMEMBER, YOU WON'T OWN THE THINGS YOU WILL BUY, YOU'LL JUST SIMPLY PAY FOR THE RIGHT TO USE IT.
YES, THIS IS WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 16, 2007, 09:48:04 AM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on January 16, 2007, 01:39:29 PM
Halo 2 on Vista, blol, who cares. It'll probably take off when Blizzard makes a new WoW or something for it though.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 16, 2007, 02:26:27 PM
DO YOU WANT TO WATCH WANG WASH WANG?!
Post by: Smoke39 on January 16, 2007, 02:57:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
Phew, good thing there hasn't been a PC game worth playing since Shadow Warrior in 1996. :]
Shadow Warrior was '97. And there have been games worth playing since it. For example, Dark Forces II and Deus Ex.
Post by: MarioAllStar on January 16, 2007, 05:03:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
Windows Vista: THE FULLY DRM-COMPLIANT(INFECTED) OPERATING SYSTEM FOR THE HIGH-DEF AUDIO/VIDEO CONTENT ERA. REMEMBER, YOU WON'T OWN THE THINGS YOU WILL BUY, YOU'LL JUST SIMPLY PAY FOR THE RIGHT TO USE IT.
YES, THIS IS WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.
This is true. For an extended look at what Vista's DRM will bring, browse through this document. If anyone has a more condensed run-down of it, feel free to share.
Quote
Vista requires that any interface that provides high-quality output degrade the signal quality
that passes through it if premium content is present. This is done through a
"constrictor" that downgrades the signal to a much lower-quality one, then up-
scales it again back to the original spec, but with a significant loss in
quality.
Upgrade to Windows Vista today to make your current hardware obsolete faster!
Post by: Ceric on January 17, 2007, 03:59:17 AM
All you OS X users I am very very surprised that you are complaining. Raise your hand if you are running 10.0. No one... Why not? It's the XP equivalent. Oh wait... Apple REQUIRES you to upgrade to get all the new features... In fact lots of software REQUIRES you to be at what about 10.3-10.4. So you have to pay for those upgrades. In fact simple updates that would be given for free to an XP user, Samba fixes I'm looking at you, in OSX you have to pay for an upgrade.
Now do you know why directX 10 is for Vista only really? It's because its part of the interface. Microsoft has finally moved the graphics processing of the GUI away from the CPU and to the graphics card. SO there are going to be some requirements for that . It has tones of potential. Especially building interfaces. I've seen them demonstrate this to there partners. I've been to different events about it. If you haven't used it don't be so harsh about it. I've used it. I like a lot of the features it bring to the table. The LPU stuff is done the same in OS X and Linux world. They got a little trigger happy in Vista about it but that will be tempered in time. The administration stuff from what I can tell is better. I know that a complete Vista system uses better encryption for communication. Plus there are lots of little things that I like more. I definitely don't agree with all the Gui decisions but the better back-end is worth it among other things.
Don't knock what you haven't tried because its hip. Over OS has its place. Plus don't believe for a second that those prices are what people even loosely affiliated with MS will pay. They'll be much much cheaper.
(Also I hate to tell you this but 2k's support cycle was suppose to end with ME's did.)
PS- Where up to what OS 10.4 So if you upgraded each time there was an upgrade and lets say that it was $129 like it is today. Then you be paying 4x$129 which is $516. If you mention deals those exist in Windows land to.
Also methinking I read somewhere that in the newer Apple computers there is a hardware piece that is for DRM purposes.
Post by: Arbok on January 17, 2007, 03:04:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
Halo 2 on Vista, blol, who cares. It'll probably take off when Blizzard makes a new WoW or something for it though.
When will that be, though?
Blizzard used to have a reputation for trying to support lower end setups, but WoW is the only game from them I have skipped over, due to the charges to play it, so I'm not sure if that motto still applies.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 17, 2007, 04:58:27 PM
As far as the Direct X 10, well your defense is kinda one sides, YES it makes sense to makeit a part of Vista, BUT it doesnt make sense to NOT allow Xp users to use it.
AnywaysI dont even care about that much as I dont game on my PC much anyways.
Wait what was I saying again... I took to long to think.
Oh yeah um you can like it if you want thats fine, but um like just cuz you like it doesnt mean everyoen has to. I have tried it I DONT like it, so far. Maybe after getting to know it Ill change my mind. I didnt like XP at first so yeah I say give it a shot, but if everything in XP works fine as it is why upgrade? I know for MS standpints its really all aboutmoney, but they always pusha new OS and always charge for it but never try and FORCE it on you.
ANyways yeah whatever the point originally was I forgot so carry on. yes I been acting wierd lately sue me.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 18, 2007, 08:38:48 PM
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on January 19, 2007, 03:00:19 AM
There goes any chance of me getting Vista until there's some major improvements done. To summarize, a lot of games showed a decrease, and there's something with how Vista implements OpenGL that made Doom 3 run piss poor on a high-end system with a Radeon 1950 XTX.
Post by: Kairon on January 19, 2007, 06:00:35 AM
Vista is... it's like... it's like a GC 2.
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on January 19, 2007, 06:47:41 AM
So I guess MS saw how well received XP's problems with older games was and decided it was important to continue in that direction. Looking at this and the Xbox 360 I question if MS has any idea what backwards compatibility is supposed to be.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 19, 2007, 06:53:49 AM
Post by: Ceric on January 19, 2007, 07:58:46 AM
Oh earlier. I just don't like when people knock what they haven't tried. I actually liked ME. I found a way to make it rock solid and it treated me well.
No I don't expect anyone to upgrade. In all actuality if I'm not administrating you I really don't care. Every big rewrite OS has its problem. Lord... OSX had its problems at the beginning but they ironed them out, well mostly...sometimes they came back. I don't expect Vista to be perfect. I expect it to be competent and I don't think it will have the level of polish that current XP has until SP1.
Post by: segagamer12 on January 19, 2007, 09:46:21 AM
Post by: Nephilim on January 21, 2007, 02:41:43 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Gameplay Only Get Worse with Vista
There goes any chance of me getting Vista until there's some major improvements done. To summarize, a lot of games showed a decrease, and there's something with how Vista implements OpenGL that made Doom 3 run piss poor on a high-end system with a Radeon 1950 XTX.
You loose performance by also running it emulated on linux, so really xp for gaming is still the only way to go
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 22, 2007, 05:36:41 AM
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on January 22, 2007, 10:17:25 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: DeadlyDQuote
Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Gameplay Only Get Worse with Vista
There goes any chance of me getting Vista until there's some major improvements done. To summarize, a lot of games showed a decrease, and there's something with how Vista implements OpenGL that made Doom 3 run piss poor on a high-end system with a Radeon 1950 XTX.
You loose performance by also running it emulated on linux, so really xp for gaming is still the only way to go
Or running a dual-boot of Linux and Windows 2000.
Post by: Ceric on January 24, 2007, 08:15:36 AM
Post by: Jin-X on January 24, 2007, 12:56:28 PM
It got a 7.8, here are their conclusions:
Quote
Conclusion
Perhaps we're spoiled, but after more than five years of development, there's a definite "Is that all?" feeling about Windows Vista. Like cramming an info-dump into a book report the night before it's due, there certainly are a lot of individual features within the operating system, but the real value lies in their execution--how the user experiences (or doesn't experience) these--and like the info-dump, we came away shaking our heads, disappointed. Compared with Mac OS X 10.4, Windows Vista feels clunky and not very intuitive, almost as though it's still based on DOS (or at least the internal logic that made up DOS). Despite the addition of a system-wide, built-in search, and various efforts to break away from staidly old directory trees, you still need to drill down one level to even access the search. And there are far too many dependencies on Microsoft products; this is not a very objective operating system, as preference is always given to Microsoft products (of which there are many), from MSN search to RSS feeds only from Internet Explorer. But is Windows Vista a bad operating system? No. It's just a disappointment for PC users who hoped that Microsoft would deliver something truly exciting to finally leapfrog ahead of Apple. They failed. But stick around; this is just Windows Vista 1.0. Windows Vista Service Pack 1 is due out sometime before the end of the year. Windows Vista SP1 promises to fix what's known to be wrong within Windows Vista and should offer a few concrete reasons to switch.
Hooray XP 1.5!!!
Post by: IceCold on January 24, 2007, 04:23:04 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 24, 2007, 05:29:44 PM
COMMAND LINES > RIBBONS
Post by: BranDonk Kong on January 24, 2007, 05:36:18 PM
Post by: Ceric on January 25, 2007, 04:33:10 AM
Also I agree. Even in Windows Word Command line is still the best if you know what your doing.
Post by: vudu on January 25, 2007, 06:13:22 AM
QuoteSeriously.
Originally posted by: Professional 666
DIRECTORY TREES ARE AWESOME.
What does Vista have against directory trees?
Even though I run XP I still use the classic start menu and the classic theme. That blue and green crap with its rounded corners insulted my intelligence. Grey boxes FTW.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 25, 2007, 06:33:07 AM
Post by: Smoke39 on January 25, 2007, 09:23:07 AM
Post by: Ceric on January 25, 2007, 11:00:02 AM
Post by: MarioAllStar on January 25, 2007, 12:05:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39
I'm too leet for grey. My colors are customized.
Ion3 on a development version of NetBSD for AMD64. I'm too leet for Windows.
Ok, I have a dual boot system and use Windows 2000 for homework and multimedia, but I use NetBSD for fun stuff (nerd stuff) and day-to-day use. During school breaks, I rarely have any reason to use Windows at all. Of course, if I was a gamer or into multimedia, I would be using Windows (or even Linux) more often.
Post by: BigJim on January 25, 2007, 05:35:33 PM
AND my Classic gray color scheme.
Vista is a dud. I have it (the final version) on another computer. Seriously, wait at least for the Service Pack to come towards the end of the year if you have a choice. This thing is a step back.
There was an article somewhere blasting Vista's usability hit. Can't find it now, but they were dead on. "Add and Remove Programs" is now called "Programs and Features." (Like that's supposed to make more sense?) Changing your wallpaper is now hidden under Personalization, while Mouse Pointers still has it's own menu item... There's just some really stupid stuff here. It's like they're rushing code so hardcore that they skipped usability almost entirely.
Not to mention many anti-virus programs don't work.
Edit: Oh yeah, speaking of usability, IE7 also sucks. Why are the buttons all over the place? Why is Forward/Back on the far left side of the menu, Refresh/Stop towards the middle right, Home/Tools on the far right, etc...
Post by: austinrock000 on January 25, 2007, 06:50:29 PM
Oh, I should mention that I'm running Vista Ultimate.
Post by: Kairon on January 26, 2007, 04:54:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: austinrock000
Funny...I open My Computer and right at the top there is an option for "Uninstall or change a program". And really, is "Personalize" really that much different from "Display Options" or whatever it was in XP? You still get to it by right-clicking the desktop. Everyone likes to go out of their way to bash Vista, and most of them have no idea what other features there are besides the redesigned GUI. I won't go into anything long-winded about it because I've tried that already, people don't want to listen.
Oh, I should mention that I'm running Vista Ultimate.
Confirmed:
-Vista will sell on "potential"
-A steal considering all the technology inside of it
-379 U.S. Dollars (for the non-gimped version)
-Hardcore computer users will buy Vista
-Developers will never use 100% of Vista 's power
and so forth...
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on January 26, 2007, 05:56:31 AM
Quote
Confirmed:
-Vista will sell on "potential"
-A steal considering all the technology inside of it
-379 U.S. Dollars (for the non-gimped version)
-Hardcore computer users will buy Vista
-Developers will never use 100% of Vista 's power
and so forth...
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Is it me or the three I bolded sound like the PS3 right now how it sells on potential, its a steal for what's inside it and developers will never max out the platform?
I still cant believe theres 6 versions of the same OS it seems a little rediculous. I think I'll stick with XP for a while until I buy a another PC that will probably have Vista packed in or I'll say screw it and venture off to Linux land.
Post by: IceCold on January 26, 2007, 06:12:31 AM
QuoteI think that's what he was going for
Is it me or the three I bolded sound like the PS3 right now how it sells on potential, its a steal for what's inside it and developers will never max out the platform?
Post by: JonLeung on January 29, 2007, 07:07:28 AM
It took me a while to get to XP. Vista sounds like something I'd get at some point, but only after it's been around for a little bit and all the kinks are worked out.
I think operating systems like Windows are too expensive. They could probably get away with it if it was something we absolutely needed (even though I still think that's unfair) but if XP (or even older versions) are sufficient, I'm hesitant to plop down the few hundred bucks now. Unfortunately I'm guessing it's not going to be significantly cheaper in a few years, though. >_<
If the original Xbox cost Microsoft a few billion, why don't they sell Vista at a loss? That'll get it into more homes a lot quicker.
Post by: vudu on January 29, 2007, 07:53:30 AM
QuoteMicrosoft relies on Windows to fund Xbox. If they didn't make money on Windows they'd be in a heap of trouble.
If the original Xbox cost Microsoft a few billion, why don't they sell Vista at a loss? That'll get it into more homes a lot quicker.
Post by: Ceric on January 30, 2007, 07:21:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: vuduQuoteMicrosoft relies on Windows to fund Xbox. If they didn't make money on Windows they'd be in a heap of trouble.
If the original Xbox cost Microsoft a few billion, why don't they sell Vista at a loss? That'll get it into more homes a lot quicker.
Yep, Plus Microsoft sells Vista for a relative loss all the time. OEMs and Partners of any sort get a steep discount on copies, think paying 10% the price. In all actuality that be like Nintendo taking a loss on the DS just because. Microsoft has this particular market and will until Apple releases OSX for general computers or someone makes an OS that is leaps and bounds better then Windows in every way and is compatible with programs developed for Windows.
Post by: Ceric on January 31, 2007, 08:23:28 AM
Someone mentioned it earlier and I thought it was interesting what they said in the article.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 02, 2007, 05:06:26 AM
Post by: Ceric on February 02, 2007, 09:39:32 AM
Also I totally disagree with the start menu search. It is much much better then Google Desktop.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on February 02, 2007, 09:48:37 AM
Post by: Athrun Zala on February 02, 2007, 11:43:58 AM
Quotelol, no, and it'll never be....
Originally posted by: segagamer12
Is vista any better than Linux?
Post by: Ceric on February 02, 2007, 01:54:24 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on February 20, 2007, 07:45:00 AM
After finally finding all the device drivers I needed, and software updates for Vista it still wouldn't open a java applet for his stocks. It was driving me crazy.
I had finally got it online and it looked as if it was working beautifully...but it wasn't.
Finally, I realized the problem...and just downloaded FireFox 2.0 and a java add-on for FireFox...now it works fine.
The time I spent with Vista I can tell it will be amazing, after all the kinks are worked out. Normally I would just say its too new and give it time...yet XP didn't seem to have these problems as bad...nor does anything Apple create. I blame Microsoft for not working closer and harder with 3rd party developers to get all necessary drivers and software updates ready before launch. Vista could have easily waited until Spring or Summer for a launch and had everything smoother and tighter than it currently is.
That said, I love the look of the OS, and it does appear to access and run the internet smoother and quicker than before.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 20, 2007, 07:49:29 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
The Top Reasons Why Vista is a Winner
haha, awesome...
Post by: Ceric on February 20, 2007, 09:42:24 AM
Post by: Spak-Spang on February 20, 2007, 03:40:27 PM
Oh well. I am not going to hate on the system like others have. It isn't a bad OS, and despite how easy it is to hate on MS...I think this OS has a bright future.
Is it Apple good? Probably not...but is it better than what is out their for Windows land? Most definitely...it just needs time to grow and bloom.
Post by: oohhboy on February 20, 2007, 05:18:51 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 20, 2007, 06:12:57 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on February 22, 2007, 02:09:13 AM
Most people are not seriously looking at Apple as a viable option. Its nice to think about, but Apple will never be more than a niche market.
To say OS X Leopard would blow away VISTA if they were released at the same time is silly. Leopard will be out in just a few months and operating systems are on the market for years. VISTA is already going to be showed up for most of its life, and it won't matter at all.
People will still buy new PCs preferring what they know to what they don't. (Buying Vista instead of an Apple.) It is that simple.
Microsoft isn't worried about Leopard because they know it isn't a threat.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on February 22, 2007, 03:55:05 AM
Also I lost respect in Apple with their platform smear campaign which got old fast. And all they can be cocky about is in the digital music space since they dominate that.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 22, 2007, 04:06:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
Phew, good thing there hasn't been a PC game worth playing since Shadow Warrior in 1996. :]
Shadow Warrior was '97. And there have been games worth playing since it. For example, Dark Forces II and Deus Ex.
Nope, Ferny was correct, you're not... =3
Post by: Spak-Spang on February 22, 2007, 04:13:25 AM
Post by: BranDonk Kong on February 22, 2007, 06:26:04 AM
Anyhow, I just upgraded to Vista Home Premium, and I'm liking it a lot. There are a couple programs that won't work due to incompatibility, but it's the vendor's fault, not really Microsoft's. It took a long time to get everything you want working on XP when it was first released as well. Anyway, if you want a great deal on Vista Home Premium, go to academicsuperstore.com or any "academic" software website, and buy the upgrade (you need to have a student/teacher ID, or just know someone who does - my sister does, got it for $69). You CAN do a complete full install using the upgrade disc, which I did. Do you google search for "complete vista install using upgrade" or something like that, it's very easy to do, and you can end up saving ~$200.
Post by: Smoke39 on February 22, 2007, 07:10:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill AurionQuote
Originally posted by: Smoke39Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
Phew, good thing there hasn't been a PC game worth playing since Shadow Warrior in 1996. :]
Shadow Warrior was '97. And there have been games worth playing since it. For example, Dark Forces II and Deus Ex.
Nope, Ferny was correct, you're not... =3
No one cares about your poor taste in PC FPSs. o:<
Post by: oohhboy on February 22, 2007, 09:24:59 AM
I do admit though, Apple is expensive. The new stuff makes PS3 look cheap. But as Apple moves deeper into x86 territory, it will have a chance to become a viable alternative.
Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
The Apple commercials may be a low blow...but they do make a point, and they are funny and to the point.
Yeah even I admit they are low, funny stuff. No one ever got hurt from a gentle ribbing right?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 22, 2007, 10:36:10 AM
4GB of RAM to visit Gmail and Myspace for an hour a day? Oh my.
Post by: Ceric on February 22, 2007, 11:26:08 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy
I must make a really crappy Apple customer. I am using the same Mac from 7 years ago. @ 450 MHz and 256MB ram, it has run like a dream for so many years and continues to do so till today. By selecting my apps properly, I have keep t up to date and fast. I would like to see a PC of similar spec to still be usable today. I do get tempted though to get a PC, but the only thing I would do on it is games. It is true in the sprit of things that there aren't Mac gamers.
I do admit though, Apple is expensive. The new stuff makes PS3 look cheap. But as Apple moves deeper into x86 territory, it will have a chance to become a viable alternative.Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
The Apple commercials may be a low blow...but they do make a point, and they are funny and to the point.
Yeah even I admit they are low, funny stuff. No one ever got hurt from a gentle ribbing right?
What OS are you running? Mac Classic?
Post by: oohhboy on February 22, 2007, 12:26:52 PM
Post by: Ceric on February 22, 2007, 02:24:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy
Currently 10.2.8. Going to 10.3.x soon. Just haven't gotten around to it. I still use Macos 9.2.2 for older apps(games) which I boot to. OSX does come with a speed hit though of around 10%. But it is stable like nothing else and it will only go crazy all if I mess with it inaproriately. The multitasking abilities are excellent. I can run multiple apps in a background while browsing with little degradation unless I am playing some sort of video. At that point I need every cycle I can get. As lean as I have set up my computer, it does have limitations, but it is more responsive than my parents computer which is atleast 5 times more powerful than mine with 4 times the RAM running windows XP.
Wow, I'm surprised. We have a lab of the last non-Intel huge tower Macs and they will bog down every once and a while with normal use. They blow what you have speckwise out of the water.
Kudos to you for finding a magically config.
I had a 750 Slot Athlon Thunderbird with 512 Meg of ram. Ran XP just as well if not better then most beefier modern computers. Sometimes you find some great systems.
Post by: oohhboy on February 22, 2007, 03:25:41 PM
The choice of apps is massively important. The apps that Apple give you are fine, but like MS, there are alternatives that are better. Safari on 10.2.8 blows with web and flash compatability. I use Camino. Best browser ever. Trust me, I have tried using a lot of other browsers out ther. Firefox, Opera, IE(Yeah WTF), Safari. Camino is light weight, optimized beast of a browser that has excellent compatabilty, and with a little extra work, additional options and tools are avaliable to really Min/Max the hell out of it.
Adium for messenger. MS's own one doesn't even work. Aduim is light, customisable, maintains a stable connection that others just can't. It is in continous development, so the features aren't complete yet, so I don't have VOIP. I am looking for a solution to that right now and is one of the driving factors in moving up to 10.3.x.
Tying out thunderbird for for mail, but it feels heavy. normally I just use the web mail as I don't get that many time senstive items.
Security. What security. Built-in firewall and computer's ip placed in to DMZ.
Congrats on your system too. It is really hard to find systems like that. More luck than anything else. People give me weird looks when I say it, but each and every machine have a ghost or a personality. Even between two indentical systems.
Post by: Donutt007 on February 23, 2007, 06:04:38 AM
How to Install Vista
Post by: segagamer12 on February 23, 2007, 06:18:00 AM
Post by: capamerica on February 23, 2007, 06:54:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy
Currently 10.2.8. Going to 10.3.x soon. Just haven't gotten around to it. I still use Macos 9.2.2 for older apps(games) which I boot to. OSX does come with a speed hit though of around 10%. But it is stable like nothing else and it will only go crazy all if I mess with it inaproriately. The multitasking abilities are excellent. I can run multiple apps in a background while browsing with little degradation unless I am playing some sort of video. At that point I need every cycle I can get. As lean as I have set up my computer, it does have limitations, but it is more responsive than my parents computer which is atleast 5 times more powerful than mine with 4 times the RAM running windows XP.
I still use a 500MHz iMac DV w/ 512MB of RAM, I've got it running OSX 10.4.8 and it runs great. I use it for all my Web releated stuff, Photoshop work and the occasional game of StarCraft.
I also use a 450MHz G4 Tower w/ 1.3GB of RAM at work and it still works great for video editing, photoshop and LightWave work. I even have a few G3 I still use for video and aftereffects.
Macs just last so much longer then PCs.
