- #1
Sprinter
- 57
- 0
Anyone here has tried it? What do you feel? Very excellent? Is your hardware "strong" enough to satisfy it?
dduardo said:Have you used Windows XP? Exactly like it, but with a "prettier" interface.
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.
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)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.
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.
Sprinter said:Windows 2003 server is the most stable one for the time being.
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.
Well of course, why wouldn't you? and not only if it gets frustrating.dduardo said:If Microsoft makes it too fustrating people will just run as admin like they do now.
Are you actually seriously asking this question?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??
Yes, I really would not know any reason not to be admin...chroot said:Are you actually seriously asking this question?
- Warren
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.gerben said:Yes, I really would not know any reason not to be admin...
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: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, 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).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
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.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.
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.However, I never understood why it was that important.
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.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?”
Some common criticisms of Windows Vista include its slow performance, compatibility issues with older software and hardware, and its high system requirements.
Windows Vista introduced a new user interface and several new features, such as Windows Aero and the Windows Sidebar. However, it also received criticism for its slower performance and compatibility issues compared to previous versions of Windows.
The minimum hardware requirements for Windows Vista include a 1 GHz processor, 1 GB of RAM, and a DirectX 9 graphics card. However, for optimal performance, it is recommended to have at least a 2 GHz processor, 2 GB of RAM, and a DirectX 10 graphics card.
Yes, it is possible to upgrade from Windows XP to Windows Vista. However, it is important to check the compatibility of your computer's hardware and software before upgrading to ensure a smooth transition.
Yes, there were some compatibility issues with popular software when Windows Vista was first released. However, many of these issues have been resolved through updates and patches. It is always recommended to check for compatibility before installing new software on Windows Vista.