Windows Vista: Reviews and Hardware Compatibility

  • Thread starter Sprinter
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Windows
In summary: If you've been on other platforms, vista is just playing catching up.Tell me one thing your looking forward to that hasn't already been implemented in another operating system yet.I'm looking forward to the Aero Glass user interface.
  • #1
Sprinter
57
0
Anyone here has tried it? What do you feel? Very excellent? Is your hardware "strong" enough to satisfy it?
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
  • #2
Have you used Windows XP? Exactly like it, but with a "prettier" interface.
 
  • #3
Exactly?

If it's exactly like XP with prettier graphics then I'll stick to Debian. That way I can just upgrade KDE when I want to see prettier effects.
 
  • #4
dduardo said:
Have you used Windows XP? Exactly like it, but with a "prettier" interface.

Ack, it's still early in beta, every new build has new features. There are infact lots of new things in Vista and I think the interface is improved too. Google search vista reviews for information on what's new on the lastest build iamsharpie & Sprinter.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Of course there are going to be a lot of new features...for windows users.

If you've been on other platforms, vista is just playing catching up.

Tell me one thing your looking forward to that hasn't already been implemented in another operating system yet.
 
  • #6
dduardo said:
Of course there are going to be a lot of new features...for windows users.

If you've been on other platforms, vista is just playing catching up.

Tell me one thing your looking forward to that hasn't already been implemented in another operating system yet.

oh don't get me wrong, I agree MS is definitely playing catchup and losing to that point, but it's still should be better than XP and that's how I look at it. It is depressing to see how long it's taken to to build a new OS with virtually no revolutionary features.
 
  • #7
How much better than XP? The problem I see is that the stuff that they are doing in Vista can and will be easily backported to XP. Most of the development libraries are going to be backported by Microsoft. There was even a case this week in which microsoft asked a skinner to remove his vista skin for xp because it looked too good. Check out the screenshot here:

http://img144.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lhwbpreview3vb.jpg

The way apple adds features between versions (10.3->10.4) makes vista look like windows xp sp3.

Probably the only reason to upgrade is for the security updates.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
The installation process of Vista is simpler than XP. The scaring thing is it requires very high-spec hardware, minimum 512MB RAM, PCI-Express graphic card, SATA HDD etc.
 
  • #9
Of course there are going to be a lot of new features...for windows users.

If you've been on other platforms, vista is just playing catching up.

Tell me one thing your looking forward to that hasn't already been implemented in another operating system yet.
Vista server will be way more interesting than the desktop. Especially for anyone who works in an enterprise.. Its deployment and Branch office management features will be cool. Also it will be more secure (hmm, we will see)
 
  • #10
Windows 2003 server is the most stable one for the time being.
 
  • #11
Sprinter,
Easier installation? How many people actually do a clean install? Sure I do clean installs at home some times, but at work there is no time to deal with fresh installing on a per computer basis. I just image the drives remotely.

The specs don't really matter because most people get Vista with a new computer. Yeah for the microsoft tax!

Anttech,
I use a custom three-stage software deployment method in linux. The first thing I always do is check to see if the package works and doesn't break anything on a test machine. Second I put the package on the centeral repository server and backup the old package. Third the other computers have a cron job that check for new files in the repository and install them. Also, if any files have been removed from the repository then the software gets uninstalled.

In *nix this type of deployment setup is a piece of cake. I'm basically using a bunch of shell scripts to automate the whole system. Sure there is deployment software already written, but the power of *nix allows me to write custom software on the fly with very little hassle.
 
  • #12
I use a custom three-stage software deployment method in linux. The first thing I always do is check to see if the package works and doesn't break anything on a test machine. Second I put the package on the centeral repository server and backup the old package. Third the other computers have a cron job that check for new files in the repository and install them. Also, if any files have been removed from the repository then the software gets uninstalled.

More power to you, but there is nothing there that i couldn't do with windows... Dont get me wrong, Linux is very powerful.. And Windows is expensive, but the majority of Enterprises use Windows infrastructures for file/print/desktops systems.. I am not the one footing the bill, my company is...
 
  • #13
Sprinter said:
Windows 2003 server is the most stable one for the time being.

Yeh I aggree... Its stable
 
  • #14
heh heh

My Uni runs all windows throughout the place. It's removed my write access to all mounted drives before for no reason that the admins could figure out. You can't use usb thumbdrives or the cd writers unless you've admin priviledges. This is one of window's weaknesses. You have to be admin to do anything useful. I'm sorry if 3.5" floppy diskettes have become almost useless, but carrying around a bag of them is just too dumb.

So I boot up Knoppix and sftp into a debian server here at home for all my class work. It (c)Just Works.

If Vista updates the Windows security profile to allow users to do what they need to do, then I'll like vista, but I've had nothing but hate for XP.
 
  • #15
Anttech, if you were footing the bill then you would care. Also, everytime Microsoft releases a new operating system it is a big production to install. With Linux your just installing new packages every so often. Your not ambushed by huge overhauls of thousands of packages.

iamsharpie, I'm lucky that my university has redhat linux and solaris workstations as well as *BSD and OSX servers. I just go to the lab and work on the *nix machines just as I do at home.
 
  • #16
What you say is true... But Windows (although I am never going to be able to convince you of this, due to your very closed mind towards M$) can offer some very exciting applications, systems technologys and development oppertunities. One example is C#.

Anyway I don't reallly like M$ but I can keep an open mind towards there products. I would prefer that they didnt have such a monoply because it is bad for our industry.
 
  • #17
If you are going to use C#, why not go with Java? At least it's portable.

I do have to admit that microsoft is good at hardware. Both their mice and keyboards are very confortable and durable.
 
  • #18
both are good, personal preference. IMO Java is slow, and hogs resources
 
  • #19
I am not MSDN subscriber, I can't get a copy of Vista, and not able to download from bittorent sources, it is too big, 1.5GB.
 
  • #20
mono

Hey anttech, if you really like C# then maybe you should check out mono

http://linuxgazette.net/issue84/ortiz.html" [Broken]

This doesn't have to become a M$ vs GNU flamewar. Sure, M$ software is easy to configure and you only have to pay the techs US$10 /hr, but I find it annoying when the mail server bites the dust. When I'm locked out of my account. When I can't save my work. When I can't compile a program with xyz compiler. If these problems disappear with Vista, great. I'm all for it.

However, as a person who has lived through several iterations of Windows, I can say with some certainty, that I doubt these things will change.

My main gripe with Windows, as you can tell from the above, is the current security policy. It doesn't allow too much without admin priviledges. It looks like that will change in vista. That's what I'm looking forward to seeing.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/security.mspx"

I too think Java is a resource hog and that M$ did a great thing with .NET and C#. Now if Sun would allow the developer to specify to the virtual machine the resources it requires (in either percentages or hard numbers, whichever is lower to the specific machine) then it might not be so bad. They might already have a way. I wouldn't know, I have no experience with Java or .NET. I figure I'll pick it up sometime.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #21
Here are screenshots of the December Vista CTP:

http://boxednews.com/vista5270/ [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #22
lol

Odd...Microsoft apparently hasn't added something to allow opening of their own parts of Vista. While playing around, I found this to get rather annoying. Nearly every part of Vista that you go into to change a setting has this pop up.

lmao!

Well, we'll see about it later. If this is finalized behavior though, then I really will be sticking to KDE.
 
  • #23
If Microsoft makes it too fustrating people will just run as admin like they do now.
 
  • #24
dduardo said:
If Microsoft makes it too fustrating people will just run as admin like they do now.
Well of course, why wouldn't you? and not only if it gets frustrating.
Why would you limit your rights on your own computer??
 
  • #25
gerben said:
Well of course, why wouldn't you? and not only if it gets frustrating.
Why would you limit your rights on your own computer??
Are you actually seriously asking this question?

- Warren
 
  • #26
chroot said:
Are you actually seriously asking this question?
- Warren
Yes, I really would not know any reason not to be admin...
 
  • #27
gerben said:
Yes, I really would not know any reason not to be admin...
Because people make mistakes -- even you. There's no reason to use administrator privileges when you don't need them; doing so leaves you much more vulnerable to deleting a file you didn't mean to delete, or allowing a malicious program you didn't mean to run access to critical OS components. If all you're doing is browsing the web or typing a paper, you don't need administrator access to your entire system.

This is standard operating practice in the Unix world, which is much more accustomed to multiple users; you only invoke superuser privilege when you need it to adjust something on the system, then return to your own user account when you're done.

- Warren
 
  • #28
chroot said:
Because people make mistakes -- even you. There's no reason to use administrator privileges when you don't need them; doing so leaves you much more vulnerable to deleting a file you didn't mean to delete, or allowing a malicious program you didn't mean to run access to critical OS components.
Yes, you are right that it may leave me less vulnerable but it also leaves me less powerful. I just do not like to have to type in the administrator’s password every time I want to change some setting.
chroot said:
If all you're doing is browsing the web or typing a paper, you don't need administrator access to your entire system. This is standard operating practice in the Unix world, which is much more accustomed to multiple users; you only invoke superuser privilege when you need it to adjust something on the system, then return to your own user account when you're done.
- Warren
Yes, I have heard much about this business when using Linux (I have winXP and Linux installed), but I also run Linux always as user “root”. Friends, who admittedly knew much more about computers than me, always advised me not to run it as root. However, I never understood why it was that important. I just get annoyed when I cannot access a file or a directory, or when I am not allowed to execute a file. I mean if I want to execute the file, then I want to do that, so when I find out that I first have to “sudo” it then I will do that, which has the same result as when I had the right to execute it in the first place; it only takes more effort (to make my potential mistake).
I do like the possibility to disallow other people that use my computer to make major and possibly dangerous changes to my system, but I do not see any use in limiting myself in this respect.
In my opinion the concept of limiting the rights of users seems to be useful only in managing the actions of the possibly incapable users of your system, but never in limiting your own privileges. Therefore I understand that almost all winXP users are administrators on their own systems.
Anyway, what it all comes down to is that the repetitive inquiry for the superuser password seems much like excessive asking of questions like: ”Are you really sure you want to do this?”
 
  • #29
I have no doubt people are going to become numb entering their admin password to change settings. When this happens you have a dangerous situation where people enter their password into anything that asks for it. Which just brings use back to what we have now.
 
  • #30
gerben said:
Yes, you are right that it may leave me less vulnerable but it also leaves me less powerful. I just do not like to have to type in the administrator’s password every time I want to change some setting.
On a properly configured machine, you can change almost anything you want about your own environment without ever needing to use root. The only reasons you'd need to use root are to change your filesystem structure, install OS updates, or change your startup procedures -- things you rarely do.
However, I never understood why it was that important.
The first time you accidentally rm -fR the wrong directory, you'll understand. If you're incapable of error, then I suppose this is not a concern, but most of us are not inerrant.
Anyway, what it all comes down to is that the repetitive inquiry for the superuser password seems much like excessive asking of questions like: ”Are you really sure you want to do this?”
There's more to it than that. If you're running as admin, and you visit a website that has been hijacked with some malicious content, your computer is going to become infected, and might become unusable. It wouldn't have happened if you were not running as admin.

Keep in mind that dduardo and others here are complaining that, on Windows, you DO need admin access to do practically anything. This is not the case on properly configured Linux machines, where 99% of the work most users will ever do does not require it.

Also, on Unix, running a root shell is very dangerous when you're using interactive programs on the command line. Many common programs can be coerced into running arbitrary commands through a shell; if you run these programs with root access, such attackers will also have root access.

You are correct that it's not a "big deal" in the sense that few people's personal computers contain any data valuable enough to bother with much protection against would-be attackers, and Windows is largely a personal operating system. On the other hand, immense, mission-critical servers have to be handled with every possible precaution.

- Warren
 
  • #31
Hey gerben, my computer literate uncle thought the same thing, until I managed to delete some key files on his windows desktop. Or did I just format the drive?

So, since kids tend to learn fast, what makes you think some 8 or 9 year old family member won't just go nuts on your drive?

They don't need to know some sort of L337 security hole if they have superuser by walking up to the monitor. I don't like for my screensaver to ask for my password, but it makes sure that my father doesn't get any bright ideas.

And most of the time, at least with a unix style security policy, you can execute those programs if you have permissions for it. Windows is far too broad about it's policy, which is why it sucks. I was hoping they would understand that.:frown:
 

Similar threads

  • Computing and Technology
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Computing and Technology
4
Replies
105
Views
6K
  • Computing and Technology
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • Computing and Technology
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • Computing and Technology
4
Replies
123
Views
15K
Back
Top