backtop


Print 187 comment(s) - last by Clauzii.. on Nov 26 at 6:57 PM


  (Source: Apple)

  (Source: Apple)
But Apple is afraid some new hacks will threaten its closed box policies.

Between Friday and Tuesday, 2 million copies of Apple's new OS Leopard were sold.  The release of Leopard, also known as Mac OS X 10.5, was covered by DailyTech earlier this month.

Analysts estimate that 200,000 of the Leopard sales were on Mac systems that came pre-installed with it.  This would indicate a very strong sales weekend for Apple in the Mac department as well.

After a torrid quarter which showed earnings risings 67 percent and sales of 2.16 million Macs, many analysts believe that Leopard may chase up some even higher Mac sales figures.

With Apple currently the 3rd largest home computer seller, and with second place Dell struggling with unsavory financial disclosures, the sky may be the limit for Apple and its new OS.

J.P. Gownder, principal analyst with Forrester Research, feels Apple faithful may be helping to spread the good word about the OS.

"Consumers typically don't understand or know why they should care about an operating system," he says, "But in the Apple ecosystem, there are lots of evangelists that play a large role in proselytizing for Apple."

Apple may face a more difficult battle climbing its way higher in market share, though.  Technology research firm Gartner Inc. stated that Apple appeared to have an 8 percent market share in the last quarter.  Gaining much more may be much tougher.

Many analysts expect weaker sales next quarter.  Apple has thrived in the summer months, traditionally, on back to school specials.  Last Christmas its sales were weaker than expected, with only 1.6 million Macs shipping in the Q4 2006.

Gene Munster, of Piper Jaffray argues though that the strong sales of Leopard should relieve any fears, as it shows that Apple's user base is eager to update their OS--and is willing to do so frequently.  He stated, "These numbers show the Mac user base is growing.  It also shows that it is an unusually active user base."

Leopard features software tools Quick Look and Time Machine, as well as the inclusion of Boot Camp to allows Microsoft OS support for gaming functionality (though Mac may soon be getting serious gaming capabilities of its own).

Leopard is so popular it has even come under hack attack--hackers have successfully unlocked the platform to run on non-Mac PCs. 

The move follows in the spirit of Jailbreakme.com, which as reported by DailyTech exploits a safari TIFF vulnerability to unbrick iPhones and iPod Touches and allow them to install third party applications.  Apple does not want to permit such applications until 2008 and will try to brick iDevices that do so. 

Likewise Apple is less than happy about its beloved Leopard being let free to run on non-Mac PCs.  Apple has had a strict policy against "clone" PCs -- PCs run an Apple OS on non-Apple hardware.  Under Gil Amelio's leadership in the 90s clone PCs were temporarily allowed, but upon the return of Steve Jobs as CEO, clones were promptly re-banned.

The wild popularity of Apple's products, both hardware and software, has led to a massive knowledgeable fan base that pick apart and unlock its programs to enjoy greater freedoms.  Apple has played a cat-and-mouse game with these hackers, but its efforts are mostly in vain, and only serve to stir up some short lived controversy, until the next unlock is found.  Some even speculate wildly that CEO Steve Jobs secretly wants hacks, but can't officially endorse them.

Will Apple torrid Leopard sales continue.  Will it one day open its platform to non-proprietary hardware.  How many Leopard copies will soon be running unlocked on PCs?  Will this help Leopard gain ground on Vista?  Only time will tell, but for now Apple can be pleased by the ferocity of Leopard's sales.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Vista's 2million mark
By howtochooseausername on 11/1/2007 11:55:14 AM , Rating: 5
Anyone know when Vista reached the 2mill mark?




RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 12:06:41 PM , Rating: 5
Dunno. They were at 20 million at the end of the first month however.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By howtochooseausername on 11/1/2007 1:24:28 PM , Rating: 2
Could anyone confirm if that number included XP licenses with Vista upgrade vouchers?


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 1:26:49 PM , Rating: 2
It didn't, however it would include people who redeemed those vouchers.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By XToneX on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By munim on 11/1/2007 12:21:15 PM , Rating: 5
No, they didn't. Then again, they did force it down Mac users.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By rcc on 11/1/2007 12:55:59 PM , Rating: 3
No, only Mac buyers.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By darkpaw on 11/1/2007 1:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
And anyone that wanted to keep using bootcamp.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By ninjit on 11/1/2007 10:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
I'm still using Windows through Bootcamp.

What they did when the disabled the beta, was prevent the creation of any NEW bootcamp partitions, but existing ones still work fine.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By theapparition on 11/1/2007 12:26:05 PM , Rating: 5
No, but they force it on all new sales of their own Apple hardware. Apple is the number 3 computer manufacturer now, behind Dell, so it's not like David and Goliath. You can also still buy any Dell with XP installed.

So, not sure what your getting at or what your trying to argue???

quote:
did I say that out loud?

Better people to think you're a fool, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt..........


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By XToneX on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By creathir on 11/1/2007 1:08:33 PM , Rating: 5
From day 1 Dell offered XP on their Optiplex line of computers. (MOST home users would not WANT a dated operating system... only those concerned about compatibility with certain software/hardware would care...)

- Creathir


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By michal1980 on 11/1/2007 2:42:39 PM , Rating: 4
vista is not anywhere near Windows ME... unless your brain dead.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By XToneX on 11/1/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/1/2007 6:53:25 PM , Rating: 2
I love how the anti Vista trolls just think that an os that has almost 100 million units sold is somehow just going to get canceled or something and everyone is going to go back to XP.

Wake up and smell the billions of dollars in revenue. Vista is selling phenomenally well. For those that have actually used the OS on a properly installed system, It is proving to be a very nice product as well.

Each and every day that goes by the asinine bashing posts sound more and more stupid the more people realize first hand that Vista is a quality OS.

Whether you like change or not it happens. Most importantly it is happening like it or not. XP more specifically 32 bit computing in general does not have the legs to hold out more than another year or two at most. The ram limit of 3 gigs is about to get blown away, and hard.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By MonkeyPaw on 11/2/2007 3:19:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
a troll posts to get a strong negative reaction, I am far from that but you seem to be just your own description.


lol Read your own post:

quote:
Welcome to Windows ME version 2 (aka Vista)

and of course Vienna is planned for 2009 so theres another OS to shove down unsuspecting user's throats


Tell me that doesn't sound like flame bait. You don't even use caps or punctuation, a la troll. Your sources are even abused. Saying that "79.9% of businesss machines do not match Microsoft's recommended requirements for premium-ready PCs to be upgraded to Vista" doesn't make the statement MS's fault. My office PC is 3 years old and has 256mb of RAM--barely enough for XP. However, the cheapest, most basic new PC can run Vista. RAM is now very very cheap, and that's the only ususual thing Vista really needs over XP.

Don't get me wrong, by no means do I think MS is perfect. However, I don't see how Apple's system is any better, considering they charge $129 for what is basically a glorified service pack.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/2/2007 4:13:44 PM , Rating: 1
Actually that would be a 2.2 ghz core, typo on my part. Nonetheless if you are building a new machine lower than a 3500+ I would have to ask why.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/2/07, Rating: -1
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By afkrotch on 11/2/2007 5:51:15 PM , Rating: 2
You do know that Vista comes in many different flavors. Every computer doesn't need to run Vista Ultimate with Aero. Every computer doesn't need all those options turned on.

I have a Pentium M laptop with onboard video and 1 gig of memory running Vista Home Premium. I can even run it with Aero, but I sacrifice GUI speed for such.

Also, do you really think businesses haven't upgraded due to computer specs? Ha! It's because no business upgrades to a new OS, until the first service pack is available. No company wants to go through the normal bugs of a fresh OS.

Not only that, they do their own testing to check on program compatability. Next year will be a very big selling year of Vista. Here at work, we are currently test bedding 3 Vista machines. We have it running on a Gateway E4300, Dell Precision 530, and a Dell Precision 490. Once all that is done, it'll be going on all our machines, even the lowly little Dell Optiplex GX270. All of which aren't dual core, have dedicated vidcard, or have 1 gig of memory.

Real world tech my ass. Here's an idea. Turn off themes service (if you even know how). Viola! Your system just became a hell of a lot faster for both XP or Vista. Pretty GUI doesn't increase office productivity.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By MonkeyPaw on 11/2/2007 6:14:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I love how you are picking specific sentences to fit your lack of real knowledge on the subject. No caps or punctuation? You must be reading the wrong comment because I forgot "AND"... oooh sorry for me not being a unprofessional journalist on a comment section of a website.


I was simply pointing out that when you fail to take the time to use proper grammar, the less likely people will take the time to read what you have to say and then take you seriously. It especially doesn't help your cause when you're taking an unpopular stance in the first place. It's not about being a journalist, it's about making a good argument. You can state all the facts you want, but isn't the point of stating such facts to sway your audience or at least make them think about what you have to say?

quote:
your personal opinion of Vista conflicts with the real world but you just refuse to admit it and in doing so you are calling others trolls or flamers.


Oh, but I have "real world" experience. Read on:

quote:
It is not until you reach at least 2GHz dualcore CPU, 128MB dedicated video card and 1GB of memory which is higher than any cheap low end system, that will run Vista properly. As a real world tech I have used it and seen it.


If you say so. I'm running Vista Ultimate right now on a S754 A64-3200 with 1GB RAM and a nice old FX5900XT. I even play games on it. HL2 EP1 is playable at 1024x768 with decent IQ settings. All my programs work, and I do more than just email and internet. Versus XP, I have had no real issues running the same apps on Vista. I even run Office 2000 with no problems!

quote:
Try using Vista on an Athlon XP3000+ or a Celeron 4XX single core with onboard graphics and you will see just how bad vista sucks.


I have. I ran it on an Athlon64 2800+ (S754 newcastle) with nVidia 6100 IGP and 1GB RAM, and it ran just fine. Certainly not a gaming machine, but it wasn't exactly one if the first place. Again, everything just worked. For fun I did try to run it on a P3 1.0ghz with 512mb RAM, but it was swapping pretty hard. I'm pretty confident more RAM would have helped, but what can you expect out of 6 year old system?

quote:
Even the number of bugs with higher end systems still warrants the fastest Service Pack in MS history.


Maybe, but I've run Vista since the RC1 days, and I've been as problem free as any other OS I've used. Maybe I'm just lucky, but then again, I don't have that high-end hardware to deal with. Still, you make it sound as though I've had no personal experience with Vista and that I'm promoting the MS party line. No, I'm just telling you that my own experiences have been very good--especially for a new OS.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By lucyfek on 11/3/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/3/2007 12:12:03 PM , Rating: 1
Depending on your hardware situation It is possible to run into problems, but these problems really have nothing to do with Vista so much as they do with raw or non-existent drivers.

It sounds like your experiences all are based on the release candidate stage of Vista, It is understandable that you saw problems from those stages. Vista and especially vista 64 Is a totally different ballgame driver wise today as opposed to even the official release. This is to be expected. People have a short memory but XP was raw raw raw at release. I picked up XP a year in and it was raw with ranters going off in every direction touting the superiority of 98, the mirror image of the situation today.

If your waiting for better 64 bit drivers wait no longer, it's worth a look now. I run vista64 and I have been loving it. At release I tried 64 and absolutely it was not up to par with 32. However now at least in my use of the OS it has been excellent for the last several months even in 64 bit.

Wireless. It is a pain whether your running XP, Vista, Linux, you name it. Hardware vendor driver support for wireless devices in vista has not been great, example d-link took a long time to get drivers out for even their little USB wireless adapters for Vista. Again however, this is not the fault of Vista or Microsoft, but the hardware vendor.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/3/2007 10:50:32 PM , Rating: 2
Notice how Mr. Potatohead has become the new TomZ. You write something that can be confirmed anywhere on the web and Potatohead calls you a "troll" and that you're "lying" or you're "stupid." Completely conjectural, no real arguments to support his claims, just MS fanbois and shills co-signing. Potatohead sucks ass.

To anyone else who likes Vista: Hey, that's GREAT! If you like it and it works for you, cool, but OS X is an awesome operating sytem. Mac fans aren't complaining about buying Leopard and for good reason. It can't be denied that a HUGE portion of Vista sales are via OEMs and there is really no way to know if Vista would sell as well if it had some real competition. Is Vista really that good or do people like it because it's the only game in town (meaning you don't have to buy a new computer to run it, like purchasing a Mac)? Since I've used both, my vote is for Mac OS X. Potatohead and the other assorted jackass MS fanbois have probably never had to actually maintain enterprise networks or even a home network with more than a couple of machines. When you point out the flaws in Vista or any Windows products, the jackass committee claims that you don't know what you are doing, even though these issues have been well documented. You can't argue against that because it is a NON-ARGUMENT. It's pointless.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By MonkeyPaw on 11/4/2007 12:30:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It can't be denied that a HUGE portion of Vista sales are via OEMs and there is really no way to know if Vista would sell as well if it had some real competition. Is Vista really that good or do people like it because it's the only game in town (meaning you don't have to buy a new computer to run it, like purchasing a Mac)?


Well Vista is by no means a "must have" upgrade. XP does indeed work very well, and MS has really done a great job developing it into a very stable OS. The problem for MS is that if people are perfectly happy with XP, then they aren't going to shell out a bunch of money to upgrade to Vista (I was fortunate enough to get Vista Ultimate for a legitimate and substantial discount). After all, most people aren't going to upgrade their OS, but people will expect any new machine they buy today to ship with a licensed copy of the latest version of Windows. Consequently, it's only natural for new machine sales to drive Vista sales.

quote:
Mac fans aren't complaining about buying Leopard and for good reason.


Sure, when the same people paid a premium for their beloved Mac hardware (with its limited upgradeablity), what's another $129 to the cause? Just remember that people running windows machines don't go around flashing MS stickers on their cars. Apple has made Mac ownership a culture, so how can you compare people buying Leopard to any normal software upgrade? I've owned Macs in the past, and I even payed for the Tiger upgrade. I remember reading about complaints and problems when 10.4 came out, and it took some updates to get those people satisfied. Mac people seem to forget this and instead try to feel superior every time MS has an issue.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 12:34:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sure, when the same people paid a premium for their beloved Mac hardware (with its limited upgradeablity), what's another $129 to the cause? Just remember that people running windows machines don't go around flashing MS stickers on their cars. Apple has made Mac ownership a culture, so how can you compare people buying Leopard to any normal software upgrade? I've owned Macs in the past, and I even payed for the Tiger upgrade. I remember reading about complaints and problems when 10.4 came out, and it took some updates to get those people satisfied. Mac people seem to forget this and instead try to feel superior every time MS has an issue.


Sounds like you have an issue with the CULTURE around the Mac moreso than the Mac itself. Which is cool because I have just as much issue with people who blindly support Microsoft. You know, the same people who slam Sony and the PS3 at every turn but give MS a free pass for the RROD fiasco. I prefer that people try to remain objective and balanced when they post and leave the fanboi-ism at the gate. I prefer to not use Microsoft products because of my history of having to maintain them... I just feel that they are a massive pain-in-the-ass. But that doesn't mean that Microsoft will never make a great product or doesn't make products that are great to some people. At least I can see why some people like MS products. But, to MS fanbois, it seems like anyone who likes Apple products or, heaven forbid, the PS3 are boobs more interested in style than substance. They shout to the rooftops about how Windows controls 90+ percent of the market and how that validates its superiority but somehow that same thinking doesn't apply to the iPod... shouldn't controlling 70+ percent of the MP3 player market validate the iPod's superiority? Not to MS fans, who will claim ad infinitum that people who buy iPods are stupid and shallow. Are people who support Windows just brainwashed zombies? You'd think so from some of the senseless bashing of other great products on these forums. I don't have an issue with people who like Microsoft products, I have an issue with people who accuse me of being stupid and shallow because I DON'T. Save that bull____. The sword cuts both ways.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 1:56:54 PM , Rating: 1
Wah wah wah vista is slow and bloated is not an argument based on a documented issue. That is ALL any of it's detractors EVER post, period.

If you want to gripe about Vista stick to the real gripes, like the fact that file transfers in it need some work. If you get extremely anomolous performance on high end or other machines that should be capable of running it then guess what, it is a hardware conflict or driver problem. That's the end of story. If you don't know how to resolve a hardware conflict or driver problem then no, sorry, you don't know what your doing.

Vista bashing is made up primarily of highly exagerated fud and propagated by asinine pseudo techs (like yourself and screwball) who do not know their ass from their elbow. The reason people argue it is because they get tired of seing absolute bullshit get touted as fact by morons (read, you).


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 5:57:43 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Vista bashing is made up primarily of highly exagerated fud and propagated by asinine pseudo techs (like yourself and screwball) who do not know their ass from their elbow.


Potatohead, you are worthless. No amount of reasoning or proof will sway you from being a total a$$hole. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is a moron but it's clear you're just a punk-ass fanboi with nothing credible to say. When you can actually BACK UP the bullshit you spout, then come at me. Until then, you are just another A$$hat spouting empty bullshit. I'm supposed to believe that you are a tech of any skill when all you spout are bullshit fables about the wonders of Vista without any balanced criticism whatsoever. I've written nothing that can't be PROVEN, unlike you. It's jackasses like you that turn forums such as these into bitch-fests.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 9:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
Show me where I have spoken of the "wonders of Vista"

Honestly, please do, show me where I have even gone so far as to say something like Vista is better than leopard.

Oh, thats right you won't find it. What you will find is my refuting simply buying into the stupidity people come out with regarding Vista's system requirements or stability.

Last I looked, your ranting abusive ass wasn't even a part of this conversation till you decided to take it upon yourself to show your amazing intellect to everyone.

If you want to come out and pour fud, yep your going to get called on it. If you want to talk about how instable Vista is, or how it can't even be run properly without a high end core2 and a boatload of ram, yep your going to get called on that too.

I'm curious, honestly what is it you want. You have many many people all echoing the same thing, that Vista is working for them. Then you have the odd person that feels the need to come in and put out the "well im a tech" disclaimer, as if it somehow makes everything you say gospel, and proceed to tell everyone they are wrong, Vista is less stable than ME, and requires at least a core2 and 2 gigs of ram or it will crash horribly possibly killing your family in the process just for kicks.

You can bet people aren't going to stand for that kind of drivel forever, I am one of them.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 11:06:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If you want to come out and pour fud, yep your going to get called on it. If you want to talk about how instable Vista is, or how it can't even be run properly without a high end core2 and a boatload of ram, yep your going to get called on that too.


Wow, the FUD police. Vista's instability and performance issues are documented on the Web. As I've stated before, I don't need to make this shit up. I wasn't implying that EVERYONE had an issue with Vista, only that complaints against the OS were legitimate. You on the other hand seem to think that Vista is flawless and that anyone who has had issues with it are stupid. You've got to take the bitter with the sweet jackass. I really hope you are on Microsoft's payroll because your devotion would be ridiculous otherwise.

quote:
I'm curious, honestly what is it you want. You have many many people all echoing the same thing, that Vista is working for them. Then you have the odd person that feels the need to come in and put out the "well im a tech" disclaimer, as if it somehow makes everything you say gospel, and proceed to tell everyone they are wrong, Vista is less stable than ME, and requires at least a core2 and 2 gigs of ram or it will crash horribly possibly killing your family in the process just for kicks.


Generally, people state their experience level to add more weight to what they say. Since nothing can really be proven, such statements have to be taken with a grain of salt. I don't have an issue with you not believing me regarding my experience, I have an issue with you claiming that EVERYONE who has posted anything re: Vista's instability or bloat are stupid or incompetent when many of those sames issues have already been addressed all over the Web. THAT'S what I call "trolling." There are VALID reasons for people to not like Vista, plain and simple. If you can't handle that then you may want to look into a more relaxing pastime, like crash test dummy.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 11:51:13 PM , Rating: 2
What does that make you? the fud police police? Do you get payed to come out and try to trash people that like Vista?

You want to stand there and tell me someone that's having trouble getting Vista to run on a brand new core2 rig with a couple gigs of ram knows what they are doing perfectly well? When their response to the problem is to jump on a forum and shout "this is worse than ME!! it can't be run even on MY awesome system!"

You have some personal problem with the fact that I take exception to that kind of fud? What is in it for you? Tell me, who is paying you for your devotion. Show me that well documented issue with vista that makes a $1500 core2 system unable to run it. You own argument is self defeating. If it was a well documented issue, these so called "techs" should have no problem working around whatever is causing this anomalous behavior on their system. There is NO documented performance issue that is going to cause the level of mayhem people are waltzing into forums exagerating about, period. Poor drivers causing low framerates or primarily 3d application issues, or possibly the ram usage issue (which there is a hotfix for and only affects 32 bit systems) do not have anything to do with these kinds of bogus claims.

You make one hell of alot of assumptions about people. If they defend Vista, they must be a Microsoft fanboy. I was one of the loudest complainers of them all back in the day when Microsoft decided Windows was the way of the future with Win95. I personaly own a PS3 and feel that microsoft realy dropped the ball on quality with the 360. (things I've seen you rant and lump people in with elsewhere such as being pro 360)

If you have a Valid reason not to like Vista, good for you, I've never faulted anything real. The things the majority of fud spewers are posting are far from valid, or at best massive exagerations.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/5/2007 12:10:18 AM , Rating: 2
I..... DIDN'T..... POST.... THAT!!!!

How many times do I have to state that!!!!! I don't even know WTF you are writing about!!!! I never wrote anything about Vista not working with my Core2 anything!!!!! My primary computer is a MAC!!!!!!

Get your facts straight.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/5/2007 12:17:19 AM , Rating: 2
Then I'll ask you, what the hell are you doing attacking me outright when my conversation was with the person who DID post that?

Why are you even addressing me on a topic if you as you say don't know what the F#%! I am writing about?

There is no answer is there? You realy just want someone to pick a fight with, so you did just that.

Your entire attack against me is based on the fact that I called someone out on their abilities? Tell me? did you even take the time to see what I was calling him out on? Because based on this dumbfounded post It sure doesn't sound like you did.

I think maybe It is in fact you that needs to get things straight, and go back to square one and see what it is you are ranting and attacking on before you rant and attack.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/5/2007 9:42:48 AM , Rating: 2
You know whats funny.

I have had disagreements with TomZ in the past. He comes out with the wrong thing sometimes, he however seems to be able to admit if he makes a mistake.

I haven't seen him come out and turn into a total profanity spewing hate spreading peice of ignorant, arrogant turd, even one fifth the degree of yourself.

I feel absolutely sorry for everyone that has to work with you in the course of a day if you behave even a fraction of how stupid you do here. This will be the official last time I bother to address you personaly. I have pointed out well in response to your violent little series of attacks here what a tool you are. I hope you someday get the help you need to find out what the hell is wrong with you and maybe learn to function in proximity to other humans.

Seriously, re-evaluate your personality.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/2/2007 3:40:42 PM , Rating: 1
I've got some very bad news for you in that case.

You are a computer tech that has absolutely no clue what they are doing. I too have seen many Vista systems go through the shop, as well as having personally loaded it on quite a few computers.

This tells me one of two things are happening here.

Either you are simply lying for the sake of trolling and trying to make it sound convincing, or you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. I am personally undecided on which of those you fall under. However I have seen no shortage of "techs" that are actually complete blubbering morons.

You don't really understand how enterprise markets work. It has been stated many times that large corporations simply do not go out and update their OS on a whim. Businesses that make large scale deployments of Vista won't do so for some time, in fact many businesses still run 2000.

If you are supposed to be some kind of technician, you should have no problem grasping the concept of the significance of 64bit computing. This is not an option over the next several years but a complete must. Vista does 64 bit and it does it well. Personaly my next desktop is likely to have around 8 gigs of ram, (my current one has 4). Is XP going to handle that for me? Does XP 64 have a stable continuously updated driver base?

Im sorry If you don't understand this, or are too uninformed to understand this. However progress marches on, and Im sorry to have to be the one to inform you that you are not the technician you think yourself to be. You wouldn't be the first, I Still remember running into plenty of so called techs that still believed windows 98 was superior to XP.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/2/2007 4:19:07 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry guy, but you are no technician.

That's the end of story. Your pulling stupidity out of your ass at this point. Problem for you is people can see that and don't automatically accept it as truth any longer.

You are just wasting everyones time with your asinine BS, I wont waste any more of mine on you.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By afkrotch on 11/2/2007 6:14:38 PM , Rating: 2
Please, just STFU. You obviously don't know what you are even talking about. You are pulling crap our your ass. I mean....75%....95%. Great that you can make up random statistics out of nothing.

Well, guess I'll go troubleshoot our HP boxes running Unix, using Horace for weather forecasting. That or our Dell servers running Linux, using NTFS (New Tactical Forecast system) software. Oh...and every piece of hardware works fine in them.

Just cause you can't get them to run XP or Linux, doesn't mean the real techs can't. MS also isn't force it on anyone. It's all up to the companies selling it on their OEM boxes. Every OEM sells business hardware with different OS options, cause of their specific needs. Even different hardware options. It's cheaper for an OEM to keep a license agreement for only one type of OS. If they could do nothing but sell Vista machines, they would. Less costly than keeping around all the different Vistas and different XPs.

Oh...there is also no such thing as a 200 mhz Pentium 2.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/2/2007 7:00:12 PM , Rating: 1
Now I know you are fulluvit... 200Mhz P2... I just tossed one out when I cleaned out my old parts the other day. Slot 1 Pentium 2 went from 200MHz to 550MHz. Original pentiums also went up to 200Mhz but they were very rare, most stopped at 166MHz.

Each number I stated above has been documented either in the local computer shop I worked for systems or by the multiple websites I linked to above. Look over it before flaming.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/3/2007 11:36:18 AM , Rating: 1
Negative again pops, sounds like you need to make a trip on down to Wikipedia.

The pentium 2 started at 233 mhz, actualy one of my friends was the first guy on the block to get one back in the day. They topped out at 450 mhz which was also the starting point of the pentium 3.

I don't know where your getting your facts from or where you found this mythical 200 mhz pentium 2 in your place but you may want to lay off the acid if thats the case.

The pentium core made it all the way to 300mhz, yes thats correct. The code name Tillamook MMX pentiums came in 200 233 266 and yes 300. MMX which of course was an overhyped set of extentions (standing I beleive for multimedia extentions but that is conjecture not 100% on it)

When it comes to someone thats so set on facts, you haven't got the first clue what they are. Nice try playing expert though, but you've just been exposed for a braindead troll.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/3/2007 12:57:59 PM , Rating: 1
If I would have known you were so uneducated, I would have saved it and scanned it onto my system to show you a real photo.
Pentium MMX made it up to 233.
Pentium2 was 200-550 (but some were rebadged as Celerons)
Pentium3 was 450-1400
Celeron was/is 266-up

plenty more info here although they stated that the information and speed reported may not be 100% correct

http://images.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_moth...


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/3/2007 1:14:32 PM , Rating: 1
I'm sorry grandpa, but your flat out 100% wrong in every sense of the word. That or you are just very hard headed about trying to lie.

Please stop wasting everyones time with your stupidity. You have multiple people telling you that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. How much longer is it going to take to register in that thing you call a brain and for that moment of realization to come over you where you are going to feel very stupid.

That is if your even capable of realizing when you are wrong, which as it seems may not be the case.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/3/2007 1:19:02 PM , Rating: 2
Here, have a link to one site.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Pentium-II/TYPE-Desk...

The pentium 2 lineup.

Have a link to another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_II

Is any of this registering on you yet? is any of it sinking in in any way? Do you have the ability to comprehend simple concepts in any way whatsoever?

Please stop trying to call the sky green and expecting people to believe you. You have exposed yourself as clueless, badly, embarrassingly so, please take a hint and save face while you can.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/3/2007 1:35:15 PM , Rating: 1
Just for the kicker.

How about the king of all sources. Intel itself

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/quickreffam.ht...

Intel's own complete library of the ENTIRETY of their processor families, Including the Pentium II family at 233-450mhz, as well as the Pentium MMX topping out at yes, 300mhz in notebook variants.

Are you starting to understand yet?


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/4/2007 11:09:30 AM , Rating: 2
Wow so your links are right even though they show the same information as mine? Yet I had a 200Mhz P2 in my hands not more than a week ago and still called a liar?
Let me guess you also believe every word Al Gore has to say and you think 9/11 was an inside job by the US government?

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

2 or more wrongs do not make a right.

Some people here are so hell bent on proving people wrong simply because they have not seen something or done something, so that automatically means the others must be wrong.
I've proven my point and your lack of education amazes me.

http://www.openfree.org/forums/showthread.php?t=12...
http://review.zdnet.com/accounting-finance/quicken... (look under specs)
http://www.intelligentfirm.com/membench/conclusion... (A 200 MHz Pentium II would be outperformed by Pentium MMX)
http://www.insightro.com/analyze.htm?aid=285 (Example: Low-end Mac PowerPC or PC with a 75 to 200 MHZ Pentium II processor)
http://www.novell.com/documentation/zfs302/pdfdoc/... (Page 6: 200 MHz Pentium II)
http://cobweb.ecn.purdue.edu/~gekco/parallel/Bench... (Page 2 and all over this document: LINUX based Pentium II 200 MHz))
http://www.metnet.mt.gov/Official_mail/FOV7-000262... (200 MHZ Pentium II CPU)

I can continue with at least 50 more sources but will leave it at that because I am sure you guys will find some more bs to say you are sooo right and I am sooo wrong.

Come back with an education next time kiddies.

Remember: wikipedia is not the end all be all of correct information. It is created, edited and changed by man which is prone to error and uneducated information much as you guys are incorrect.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 1:49:34 PM , Rating: 1
Holy shit guy. I just cannot beleive how dense you are.

Intels own database shows NO 200mhz pentium 2, NOR does it show it stretching from 200 MHZ to 550, but rather 233-450.

You are simply being rude and stupid for the sake of it at this point. I understand you cannot admit you are wrong, but get over it.

If you don't like wikipedia FINE theres a link there from INTEL, the f-ing manufacturer. It confirms what you are saying is flat out wrong. So get over it.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 2:02:00 PM , Rating: 2
I've read through your sources, most of them do not even show what you are claiming. One is copy of an email from someone outlining a bunch of processors.

Yeah, absolutely I am going to believe an email from someone over a processor family archive from INTEL, THE MAKER OF THE F-ING PROCESSOR LINE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

I think you fit in realy, realy well with the other pseudotech trolls on this site. Especialy in the arena of pulling dilusions out of your ass.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/3/2007 11:36:27 AM , Rating: 1
Negative again pops, sounds like you need to make a trip on down to Wikipedia.

The pentium 2 started at 233 mhz, actualy one of my friends was the first guy on the block to get one back in the day. They topped out at 450 mhz which was also the starting point of the pentium 3.

I don't know where your getting your facts from or where you found this mythical 200 mhz pentium 2 in your place but you may want to lay off the acid if thats the case.

The pentium core made it all the way to 300mhz, yes thats correct. The code name Tillamook MMX pentiums came in 200 233 266 and yes 300. MMX which of course was an overhyped set of extentions (standing I beleive for multimedia extentions but that is conjecture not 100% on it)

When it comes to someone thats so set on facts, you haven't got the first clue what they are. Nice try playing expert though, but you've just been exposed for a braindead troll.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/3/2007 11:31:24 PM , Rating: 2
You're a REAL tech. I bet you have a huge penis, too. And a 150ft yacht. And more poon than Ron Jeremy.

Yeah. Sounds like you are just another MS B-I-T-C-H-B-O-Y.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 2:13:18 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, you realy add alot to the conversation with your insightful and well thought out posts don't you. Clearly beyond just coming out to do nothing more than insult me you refuted so many of my very real points.

Oh wait, no thats right your just another of the dailytech pseudotech patrol. Aka the I think I know everything but realy know nothing club.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 6:03:42 PM , Rating: 1
You can't reason with the stupid (read, YOU). As for insulting you, I can't do it enough. I'm thinking of making it my personal hobby because stupidity like yours makes it so easy. It's easier than waiting for you to write something credible because that is obviously NEVER going to happen. Tell you what... when you write something intelligent and balanced about Vista, I'll leave you alone. Until then, you are my bitch.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 8:25:10 PM , Rating: 2
Ok troll.

You know it is realy flattering you are so obsessed with me that you follow me around commenting on everything I say with a rabid attempt at forum bullying.

I think it's perfectly clear what you are. Your one of those guys that needs to get his ass kicked very very badly. Very badly. Someone that personifies hiding behind internet anonymity to spout trash.

Some day you are going to get cocky, open your mouth and try to talk to someone like that in the real world and your going to get your teeth knocked the hell out. It's going to happen. Not a question of if but when.

The irony of you even claiming to speak in a balanced way on Vista is laughable.

Tell me, does strolling in and talking about Vista being ME2, on it's way out, then making up BS about how it cannot be run on anything below a dual core without 2 gigs of ram sound like "a balanced opinion"?

You are simply a little wanna be bully with a chip on your shoulder a mile wide. A waste of skin as well. Your welcome to come post personal attacks on everything I say, by all means. It only serves to show off what a tool you are. Doing a great job so far angry little man.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 10:53:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think it's perfectly clear what you are. Your one of those guys that needs to get his ass kicked very very badly. Very badly. Someone that personifies hiding behind internet anonymity to spout trash.


Potatohead, believe me, the last thing you want to do is come across me in real life. I'm as far from a geek with a pocket protector as you can get. The odds of you kicking my ass are as bad as you saying something intelligent. Thank your lucky stars that you have all of cyberspace between us.

quote:
Tell me, does strolling in and talking about Vista being ME2, on it's way out, then making up BS about how it cannot be run on anything below a dual core without 2 gigs of ram sound like "a balanced opinion"?


The WORST part about this statement is that I DIDN'T WRITE what you are referring to, regarding ME2 or the dual core statement!

I'm done, you can have the last word. I'll jump on your ass later when (not if, WHEN) you write something stupid. Later chump.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 11:38:06 PM , Rating: 2
The person who did is whom I was adressing, Not you, you did what is called butting your head in to comment on something for no reason other than to attack someone. The person who DID called Vista ME 2 and made the outrageous claims I was referring to, and I might add was very correct in calling him out on the falseness of.

And please, f-off with the internet tough guy routine. You remind me of that guy I read about in Mexico. He was into bullying some woman in World of Warcraft, made the mistake of pulling the same attitude you are right now and giving out his address. Long story short, her husband showed up with some buddies and gave the guy a good beatdown and trashed his computer. You know sweet nothing about me or what I may or may not be capable of. So save the oo I'm a big scary guy talk. As it so happens I'm just a little ways awyay from being a pocket protector geek myself.

Dumbasses like you are never done, always have to have the last word, or sound tough, sound cool, boost that fragile ego. You are most welcome to come out and show everyone what a tard you are, personaly I think you have a secret love interest in me or something the way you like to follow me around. I'm realy flattered honestly but I just don't feel the same as you do sailor.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/5/2007 12:28:28 AM , Rating: 1
A jackass and a bitch too. Lump in asshole for the trifecta.

I DO know that you are a punk-ass bitch. Because only a bitch would bring up "kicking ass" over the Internet.

As for "sounding tough," you bring your corny ass to this forum with no substance, no f___in proof of the overwhelming majority of your claims, disrespecting people you don't know and then GETS MAD when someone clowns you? I don't have to know you personally to know you are a bitch.

Jackasses like you use bullying tactics to attack anyone who doesn't agree with you and then have the nerve to bitch-up when you get some of your own medicine. That's why I went at Tom Z and that's why I'm coming at you. I get sick of chumps like you attacking people that make the mistake of disagreeing with you. You were right on ONE FUCKIN' POINT, the Pentium thing. Other than that, you're accusing people of spreading FUD about Vista when damn near almost everything said about Vista can be VERIFIED! What type of jackass does that?

For your info, the last jackass that came at me like you just did got K.O.ed. But threatening over the Internet is stupid and if I didn't respect the fact that I don't know you, I'd be asking for your address right now. YOU brought up the ass-kicking, not me. But I'm telling you right now, the LAST fuckin thing you want to do is see me. Get off the fuckin tough guy routine because its bullshit from BOTH sides. Let stupidity drop for once.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/5/2007 9:07:37 AM , Rating: 1
Theres a bit of a difference, I said you need your ass kicked, and that you will probably get it soon enough if you try to talk to people that way in the real world. That is a difference from bragging ones self up about how tough one is. That would be all you tough guy. Yes, you still do need a good slap upside the head, someday someones going to give it to you. Chances are it won't knock much sense into you though by the look of it, it's a bit late.

You yourself ADMITTED you didn't know what the hell I was writing about. You have a LOT of nerve talking to me about bullying tactics. Especialy when that is ALL that you are capable of doing in a conversation.

I will ask you one last time to show me where it can be verified that Vista is barely useable on anyhing less than a core2 with 2 gigs of ram. Because that was the ONLY other point the person in question (the same one who argued about the pentium) made. If you cannot answer that question, do not waste my time.

The person who was arguing about the pentium was the ONLY person involved in the conversation bashing vista. Every single point he made was in fact fud. If you had read ANY of it, you would have some clue as to that. However, you didn't you came to pick a fight, period.

If anyone is a little bitch I think you need to go take a look in the mirror to have a look at him.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/3/2007 11:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are a computer tech that has absolutely no clue what they are doing. I too have seen many Vista systems go through the shop, as well as having personally loaded it on quite a few computers.


Ummm, yeah... see my previous post.

quote:
Either you are simply lying for the sake of trolling and trying to make it sound convincing, or you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. I am personally undecided on which of those you fall under. However I have seen no shortage of "techs" that are actually complete blubbering morons.


See how this is a completely hollow assessment? Sounds like he knows what he's talking about, right? I think a "moron" is someone who denies something for which there is plenty of proof? Problems with Vista? You can find credible articles all over the Web to support that. Microsoft may have improved Vista a great deal but no less than Rahul Sood, founder of VoodooPC and HP's CTO of Gaming, was highly critical of Vista when it first came out. When one of the premier system builders in the business has issues with a product, then the product has ISSUES, it's that simple.

quote:
Im sorry If you don't understand this, or are too uninformed to understand this. However progress marches on, and Im sorry to have to be the one to inform you that you are not the technician you think yourself to be. You wouldn't be the first, I Still remember running into plenty of so called techs that still believed windows 98 was superior to XP.


Wow, if this isn't a jackass statement. I love how it's a personal insult veiled as intelligence. However, I tend to not be as subtle... Potatohead is a jackass. His statements are completely conjectural and fly completely in the face of well documented issues. His argument amounts to "If you don't like Cap'n Crunch because it cuts the roof of your mouth, you've never actually eaten cereal. I know a lot of guys THINK they've eaten cereal but they are actually morons who haven't because, if they had, they would love Cap'n Crunch. You are stupid because it cut the roof of your mouth... I've eaten a billion bowls and I've NEVER cut the roof of MY mouth. You are a stupid troll who doesn't know how to use a spoon."

Nobody needs to criticize Vista for two reasons:

1) It's not going to make a difference. Vista will come pre-loaded on almost every new computer sold and MS is going to get paid regardless and;

2) Every issue with Vista has been documented a million times on a crapload of sites.

So its conceivable that people who criticize Vista have ACTUALLY had issues with it. The HELL, you say? But I guess it is IMPOSSIBLE that competent individuals have actually had problems with Microsoft products. Please confirm this so that I no longer have to pretend that you have any credibility Potatohead. PLEASE say that EVERYONE who has had problems with Vista is stupid and incompetent. Please say that there are absolutely NO CREDIBLE reasons for not liking Vista. PLEASE expose yourself for the complete jackass you really are.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 2:24:27 PM , Rating: 2
You are realy good at putting up a wall of meaningless text laced mainly with personal insults and attacks.

I see only one thing worth commenting on in your entire rant.

Raul Sood. Everyone had issues with Vista when it first came out. Let me say that again and quote you, when it first came out. There were loads of poor drivers about when the OS came out, big shocking revelation. Everyone knew that already.

That was what now? 11 months ago? A new OS is going to have oversights, guess what, Leopard does too. XP did, XP had TONS of documented bugs, I am paraphrasing a number from an article here but the known bug count for XP at launch was something like 10k, that number could be inacurate to some degree. Vistas known bug count at the time of release was pared down to aproximately 500.

Now that 11 months have gone by, the reviews and testimonials that Vistas driver issues are a thing of the past are indeed coming out, and a service pack is on the way to adress real gripes like the file transfer issue as early as next year.

Now because there are expected issues with a new os, does not mean that the complete BS that people come spouting can just be let go. Vista is slow on a core2 with 2 gigs of ram, give me a break. You yourself are one of the biggest Vista BS merchants this site has seen, so your interpretation of fact is worth about as much as used toilet paper.

Acknowledging real issues and blowing them out of proportion and making up your own are two different things champ.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 6:39:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now because there are expected issues with a new os, does not mean that the complete BS that people come spouting can just be let go. Vista is slow on a core2 with 2 gigs of ram, give me a break. You yourself are one of the biggest Vista BS merchants this site has seen, so your interpretation of fact is worth about as much as used toilet paper.

Acknowledging real issues and blowing them out of proportion and making up your own are two different things champ.


Hmmmm, sounds like shilling to me. But I'll address this BS real quick...

The issues regarding Vista's development are well documented. I don't have to make them up. Anymore than I have to make up that Microsoft employs probably the largest team of qualified developers in the world as well as some of the most brilliant computer scientists in the business. And yet the mediocrity of the Windows code base is almost legendary. Look what Apple has managed to produce with a fraction of the resources... or the fact that the BeOS was five years more advanced than anything coming out of MS or Apple with even fewer developers. Instead of continuosly patching up its OS, MS should be developing new ways to add value to its system, specifically pioneering new methods for user interaction and cataloging and accessing information. MS employs some of the most advanced user interaction experts but anyone with any experience in UX could write a book about what's wrong with the Windows user interface. Let's not talk about its networking stack which should be one of the most advanced around by now, especially since it originally started as the BSD networking stack. But it's just now showing some semblance of stability. I'm by no means the only tech that has had to wrestle some random networking issue in Windows but I guess we are all "stupid," huh?

These are just two of the areas that Windows has suffered chronic issues. My only claim is that , BASED ON MICROSOFT'S FINANCIAL AND INTELLECTUAL RESOURCES, THE WINDOWS OS IS EXCEPTIONALLY BAD. If Apple, with a fraction of the resources, can create an OS that is competitive with Windows, what does that say about Microsoft? Hell, Be Inc. had capabilities that weren't match for FIVE YEARS in either Windows or Mac OS. So what the f___ is the excuse? "Good enough" doesn't cut it with me and shouldn't cut it with you either.

And before you come out of your ass about the compromises in OS development, understand that virtualization has practically eliminated one of the main issues with instability in Windows, which is backward compatibility. On top of that, how can you explain Microsoft coming out with a TRULY innovative concept like Surface, which proves that the company CAN come up with groundbreaking technology that improves the user experience?

Stop towing the party line for once and use your damn brain. Calling Microsoft on the quality of its products, especially in light of its resources, is RESPONSIBLE. Maybe you need to grow up a little more to understand that.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 8:43:35 PM , Rating: 2
You need to learn to communicate without putting up a wall of ranting that noone wants to sift through to find the one or two points you are trying badly to make.

You don't like Windows is that maybe what you are trying to say? What did microsoft do to you? kill your dog? drop a pallet of windows copies on a family member?

What exactly do you expect out of a consumer level OS that is expected to somehow support every last peice of hardware on the planet. The way you talk you could do better, hell the way you talk the linux community should have already done better. Yet it hasn't. Ubuntu is the closest Linux has ever come to being a useable consumer version of Linux. It still doesn't cut it.

Apple has an extremely tight and controlled hardware base to develop for. Yet despite that, surprise surprise, bugs still happen, flaws still happen. To contend their OS is competetive with windows is a pipe dream. For their OS to contend with windows it would have to support and be tested on many times the hardware base beyond the handfull of mac models apple so tightly controls.

I have been around to use every consumer level Microsoft OS since Dos 6.2. Nothing they have done has been perfect, however they have shown excellent progress. Vista has been in my opinion one of the smoothest OS releases in their history, surpassing that of even XP which was extremely raw for it's first year, both in compatibility, and drivers. Even so in the network stack you complain so loudly about, which got much more robust by service pack 2.

Calling a company on the quality of it's product is a far cry from making up false accounts to support ones dislike of said product. If you can honestly sit there and tell me with a straight face, that someone coming across saying Vista barely runs on any system below a dual core / 2 gig spec, then honestly EVERYONE is wasting their time listening to what you have to say.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 11:35:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You don't like Windows is that maybe what you are trying to say? What did microsoft do to you? kill your dog? drop a pallet of windows copies on a family member?


No, I've only had to support it in enterprise environments for well over a decade as well as using it when I built ultra-high performance PCs for a living. Gee, what was I thinking criticizing a family of operating systems I've used continuously for years, that I've supported in networked environments, and delved into extensively to build computers?

quote:
What exactly do you expect out of a consumer level OS that is expected to somehow support every last peice of hardware on the planet. The way you talk you could do better, hell the way you talk the linux community should have already done better. Yet it hasn't. Ubuntu is the closest Linux has ever come to being a useable consumer version of Linux. It still doesn't cut it.


I expect a strong code base with minimal design flaws and an intuitive user experience. That's why I use Mac OS X. The Linux statement is just too dumb to address.

With the leverage MS has, it could EASILY create APIs that ensure that hardware and software runs properly on its platform... wait a minute, IT DID!!!!!! It's called DIRECT X!!!!!!!! So it creates a framework to ensure that at least 50% of the software written for it (games) works properly but it can't ensure that level of stability in the rest of the platform? You can't have it both ways.

quote:
Apple has an extremely tight and controlled hardware base to develop for. Yet despite that, surprise surprise, bugs still happen, flaws still happen. To contend their OS is competetive with windows is a pipe dream. For their OS to contend with windows it would have to support and be tested on many times the hardware base beyond the handfull of mac models apple so tightly controls.


Re: the Apple thing, I'll answer with this URL:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/27/leopard-vs-vist...

As for the "controlled" hardware statement, MS has been popping the same crap line for awhile now. See above statement.

quote:
I have been around to use every consumer level Microsoft OS since Dos 6.2. Nothing they have done has been perfect, however they have shown excellent progress. Vista has been in my opinion one of the smoothest OS releases in their history, surpassing that of even XP which was extremely raw for it's first year, both in compatibility, and drivers. Even so in the network stack you complain so loudly about, which got much more robust by service pack 2.


I can't fault you if your expectations are so low. "Excellent progress" is relative.

quote:
Calling a company on the quality of it's product is a far cry from making up false accounts to support ones dislike of said product. If you can honestly sit there and tell me with a straight face, that someone coming across saying Vista barely runs on any system below a dual core / 2 gig spec, then honestly EVERYONE is wasting their time listening to what you have to say.


I didn't state that. And everything I HAVE stated can be proven.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/5/2007 12:11:44 AM , Rating: 1
Just what are you trying to state. From my perspective all you have done is come charging in and make some attempt at a personal attack on me while talking about totaly different subjects than what you are even attacking about.

I called a guy out for doing the "I'm a tech and vista is worse than ME because it takes at least a 2 ghz core2 and 2 gigs of ram to run it" routine. Let me ask you, do you support that posters statements? is he correct in his assertion that Vista has performance requirements so high that it is un-useable on any system below this spec? If you do I would sugguest you maybe re-evaluate because all your talk about your career experience is going to seem rather questionable. Please do take the time between your chest thumping and attacking to try and answer this one because I am quite curious as to what the answer will be.

So far, all you have managed to do is charge in and attack blindly in the process of stating your position that you feel Windows as a whole is just a terrible thing. This in no way relates to the original conversation regarding someone being foolish and trying to make up numbers and false performance claims. (which alot more people besides myself had the guts to call him on I might add.)

Am I supposed to honestly beleive the experience and credibility of someone who claims to have a decade of industry experience yet trots around making threats and calling people his bitch on forums? Yeah lets just think on that for a bit on just how professional your attitude seems.

If Apple realy wanted to do something good for the industry, and realy spur innovation and serious competition with Windows, then they would start developing their OS for use on all hardware not just their own tightly controlled overpriced hardware. Why do you suppose they don't? Likely because they like making a great deal of money on overpriced style based hardware. Likley also because there is a huge amount of overhead in testing coding for, and supporting for all those different hardware variations.

But hey, you say they can do better than microsoft with a fraction of the size, so tell me, why don't they. Whats stopping them from going out and crushing Windows with this superior software by opening it up to non Apple hardware? The fact they simply do not have the ability or the guts to try and support a hardware base the size Microsoft attempts to.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/5/2007 12:52:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I called a guy out for doing the "I'm a tech and vista is worse than ME because it takes at least a 2 ghz core2 and 2 gigs of ram to run it" routine. Let me ask you, do you support that posters statements? is he correct in his assertion that Vista has performance requirements so high that it is un-useable on any system below this spec?


"Un-usable"? No. Not very usable? Yes. Every article I've read states that 2GB is the sweet spot for Vista and, even then, it may not run smoothly. Graphics acceleration seems to be more valuable to the Vista experience than RAM or the processor.

Is it possible that screwball didn't like the performance HE got out of Vista at the spec he stated? Could it have been unusable FOR HIM? Hell yes! Especially if he had a crisp XP install to compare it and depending on the work he does.

Bashin the guy for HIS EXPERIENCE with Vista was pointless. But I guess that doesn't make YOU a troll. I GUARANTEE that someone else is having the exact same experience as screwball... does that make him/her "stupid"?

When you attack, you open yourself for attack. I don't want to be called "stupid" whenever I don't agree with someone and I'd like to think you don't either. Like I stated before, the sword cuts both ways.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/5/2007 9:22:08 AM , Rating: 2
Vista runs just fine, and very "usably" on less than 2 gigs of ram. You are aware that there are multiple versions of Vista correct? I run Visa basic on two computers with one gig of ram at work. It runs just as well as the 2 XP computers in the same room.

Graphics acceleration is a non issue, If you have Aero turned on you need a little bit of graphics horsepower. Emphasis on little, aero works fine even on many integrated graphics solutions. Many many systems with integrated graphics and less than 2 gigs of ram have been sold through the shop and they all work just fine.

I am bashing this guy because he has the nerve to come out with a point by point style attack on Vista based on complete nonsense. Did you even read the guys original post? I doubt it. I wasn't the only person that called him out on it.

If you want a perfect example of situations where someone gets anomalous Vista performance I like to think of John Romero's blog which I read a while back. Romero isn't a stupid man, a professional game developer. He had a blog about Vista way back at the time of release how it was bluescreening and running slow on his system. Because the guy actualy knows what he is doing, he used proper troubleshooting to find the problem which was in the end his wireless card. After that his opinion on Vista changed.

THAT is what most situations like screwballs come down to. Someone gets an anomalous situation, ASSUMES that their situation is characteristic of the entire picture. Then starts doing stupid things like dropping the "well im a tech" bomb on everyone and telling them Vista sucks for something like this. Not acceptable.

Again you are noone to talk about attacks, every one of your posts has been an attack, and on a conversation you were not even a part of. Or as it seems even aware what it was about.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/5/2007 1:00:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If Apple realy wanted to do something good for the industry, and realy spur innovation and serious competition with Windows, then they would start developing their OS for use on all hardware not just their own tightly controlled overpriced hardware. Why do you suppose they don't? Likely because they like making a great deal of money on overpriced style based hardware. Likley also because there is a huge amount of overhead in testing coding for, and supporting for all those different hardware variations.

But hey, you say they can do better than microsoft with a fraction of the size, so tell me, why don't they. Whats stopping them from going out and crushing Windows with this superior software by opening it up to non Apple hardware? The fact they simply do not have the ability or the guts to try and support a hardware base the size Microsoft attempts to.


It's smart to control the platform... MS does it, it's called the XBox360. But I won't waste time arguing with you about something you know so little about.

According to Engadget, OS X IS already superior, at least feature wise. Many people have stated the same thing. So there goes your argument.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/5/2007 9:26:48 AM , Rating: 2
See how you go in circles and avoid any legitimate conversation? If something comes up you don't have the answer to you get ignorant and say something like "well thats just so stupid I wont even reply."

Do you ever stop to think about how unbeleivably arrogant you yourself are? Where did I ask you about what engadget thinks about the featureset of leopard? I asked you why Apple doesn't take this superior product to everyone. You avoided the question because you do not like the answer, because they can't.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Screwballl on 11/2/2007 6:51:21 PM , Rating: 1
Wow theres alot of MS fanboys here... let me make this simple and easy to understand:

I can install XP on a 333MHz Pentium3 system with 64MB of memory and it can run "flawlessly"... but whos dumb enough to? Oh wait you have Vista on a Celeron M or some system that can barely handle XP properly or with any speed.

You fanboys have fun, I'm done arguing with uneducated teeny boppers who think they know it all and go play soccer with my kids.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/3/2007 11:26:35 AM , Rating: 1
While your with the kids maybe you should ask them for some pointers. I think theres a pretty good chance they know more than you do.

I think It's pretty clear you are not only a troll at this point but a stupid one. After all your blathering stupidity you are now asking why someone would Install vista on a low spec machine...

Thats the entire point dipwad. Theres no need to install It on a celeron system when you can get an entry level core2 with not one but two gigs of ram for barely more than $500.

If you want to talk about uneducated it sounds like your ability to learn stopped dead in it's tracks a long time ago. After all if you can't even troubleshoot a hardware problem or install Vista correctly while claiming to be some manner of technician, then you are just a total waste of space.

It would be nice to be a teeny bopper, unfortunately back in the real world I just turned 30 so I guess you strike out again there mister super expert. Have a fun afternoon with the kids make sure to have a nice talk with them and see if you can learn a few things from them.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/3/2007 11:27:04 PM , Rating: 1
Just turned 30? I guess stupidity ages like a fine wine.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 2:30:47 PM , Rating: 2
There comes the pot calling the kettle black.

Ladies and gentlemen, the original vista fud moron himself.

Take a bow forum troll.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/4/2007 6:45:17 PM , Rating: 2
Truth is "fud," huh? That's why you are a total jackass. As for "trolling," let's not get your mom involved in this.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Locutus465 on 11/2/2007 4:23:03 PM , Rating: 2
Personally I'm loving DreamSceen, something that I'm not sure if OSX even has an equivelent for... Right now I have a lovely hilly landscape with gently moving water as my background (for those not familiar, DreamSceen allows setting video files as your background)...


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By ToeCutter on 11/4/2007 2:20:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Personally I'm loving DreamSceen


Disable DreamScene.

Enable SpellCheck.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By ToeCutter on 11/4/2007 2:16:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Each and every day that goes by the asinine bashing posts sound more and more stupid the more people realize first hand that Vista is a quality OS.


Actually, after reading several of your posts, you're the only one sounding "more and more stupid".

You like Vista. Wow. Neat.

But guess what, there are quite a few others that feel that Vista blows. HARD. Go use some of your self-professed Google Foo and read the Vista previews from spring of this year. I don't recall Vista being hailed as the greatest OS of all time by anyone. In fact, I recall being a little surprised with how hostile some of those early reviews were on Vista.

I've been using Vista since RC1 and the road to RTM was painful. Vista's incomplete. Unfinished. And considering the development time invested on Vista, it's simply inexcusable. I'm not a Vista hater, but I am sorely disappointed with what MS shipped as RTM.

Likewise, I've been using Leopard since the 9a5xx builds were seeded. Early builds of Leopard were just as painful. But in stark contrast to MS, Apple finished Leopard before going gold. I've had to upgrade only a handful of apps for Leopard. And those updates were available less than 3 days after the retail release. Not too shabby, regardless of your OS fanboy affinity.

Your insistence that quantity equals quality is sideways. Just because MS has sold millions more licenses for Vista vs. Leopard doesn't make Leopard inferior. Seagate sells alot more SATA drives than FC, but that don't make SATA any "better".

I suppose Leopard being cheaper than Vista means it's not as good, right?

Go write up a mini-review of Leopard including all the things that Vista can do better than Leopard and I'll listen.

Until then, you're just another yapper making alot of noise and little sense.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/4/2007 9:14:58 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly, show me where I said Vista is a better OS than Leopard? please, do it.

It's not there. That is because you are making it up. I said Vista is a good OS, I stand by that, I use the OS at home and at work. It works well. That is the end of story on my personal experience and opinion of Vista.

You are welcome not to like it, You are even welcome to hate it. You are not however welcome to make up false rants about stability and system requirements and tout them as gospel when they are simply 100% false, 100% fud.

Heres a news flash for you, I realy don't give a rats ass if you listen to me, who the hell are you? the president of the united states? No your just another forum ranter. Take your place in line behind the others.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By T4RTER S4UCE on 11/1/2007 3:18:20 PM , Rating: 2
I do not entirely agree with what you say, but your right about how most people don't like a change in OS.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Ryanman on 11/4/2007 6:30:34 PM , Rating: 1
Oh really? the Optiplex? those are the most prevelant right?
Everyone keeps downrating this guy... why? You KNOW dell and M$ DID force it through. For you to name some obscure product line was offered with XP as proof of Dell not wanting to sell Vista is stupid.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By BladeVenom on 11/1/2007 12:56:59 PM , Rating: 3
The top 5 in the world are HP, Dell, Lenovo, Acer, and Toshiba.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By theapparition on 11/1/2007 1:30:07 PM , Rating: 4
According to the DT article above, apple was number 3 behind dell as home computer sellers. The fact that the stats excluded business sales and probably only included US sales eluded me. I'm sure DT got it from some Apple PR overstating their marketshare.

You have to be careful of statistics like that, 93.2% percent of statistics can be made up on the fly. :-)


RE: Vista's 2million mark
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By MGSsancho on 11/2/2007 2:08:08 AM , Rating: 2
correct. and the GP was talking about in the world. your is in America :)


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By jtemplin on 11/2/2007 9:56:11 AM , Rating: 2
Kent: Mr. Simpson, how do you respond to the charges that petty
vandalism such as graffiti is down eighty percent, while heavy
sack-beatings are up a shocking nine hundred percent?

Homer: Aw, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent.
Forty percent of all people know that.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By murphyslabrat on 11/1/2007 4:23:47 PM , Rating: 2
Also, that is PC sales. Apple is technically not a PC vendor, even though they do sell computers aimed at personal use. The reason being is non-compliance with the "Personal Computer Standards" set by IBM way back in the days of the Intel 8088.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By hiscross on 11/1/2007 4:41:56 PM , Rating: 4
It just comes to show you how ignorant some people are about Apple (and I'm sure Microsoft). Like Microsoft deal with hardware companies, they have their latest OS installed by default. Most new Mac shipping today more than likely has 10.4 installed. In a few weeks or sooner, 10.5 will be installed on all new Mac's. 10.4 will still be available for those who don't want 10.5. If the apple/microsoft/linux/unix/cpm/zos, etc haters have to continually say bad things they clearly don't understand or are so ignorant about, then there are some real friendly countries, like Iran and Syria you can move to. Let this fine site be for the more civilized.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By erikejw on 11/2/2007 6:25:17 AM , Rating: 1
And Israel should be avoided too.

"Nearly 60% of European citizens believe that Israel is the greatest threat to world peace, more than Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan, according to the results of a European Commission poll due to be published tomorrow."


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By mars777 on 11/2/2007 7:37:31 AM , Rating: 2
Israel gave you the Intel Core 2!


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By erikejw on 11/2/2007 12:10:46 PM , Rating: 1
Well, Core 2 or world peace?
It's a tough question but I go with world peace ;)


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Ringold on 11/3/2007 5:48:59 PM , Rating: 2
I'd go for the Core 2. :P


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Clauzii on 11/26/2007 6:57:07 PM , Rating: 2
It might be that You are "forced" regarding the OS on a MAC. (Which is an option to use, since one can run XP/VISTA as well...)

In DK the readybuild PC's comes with Vista only! (besides some Toshiba Laptops that can be ordered with XP instead). It's preinstalled and has been since march. The shops were told to sell Vista pre-installed or the shops had to pay for all the Vista-adds used in the stores themselves, if they waited till later with preinstalling Vista.

Talking about pressure here too then :O


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SunAngel on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By FITCamaro on 11/1/2007 12:32:35 PM , Rating: 4
Drunk post much?


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 12:39:42 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
c hw lief is toilet. NY sld ther sols to intl 4 x86/x64. had thy stad wth PPC we hv PS3 flvrd wth OSX instd uv ol yllr.

I'm usually pretty good at translating but I have to admit defeat here. Can you re-post that, in something coherent?

*Attempted Translation*
Hardware Life is crap. Apple sold their souls to Intel for the X86/X64 processors. They should have stayed with IBM Power. We could have had PS3's with OSX instead of "Yellow Dog" the Linux Distro on the PS3 Currently.

Is that about right?


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By AvidDailyTechie on 11/1/2007 12:59:30 PM , Rating: 2
brilliant


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Ringold on 11/1/2007 1:24:43 PM , Rating: 3
I think you deserve a six just for cracking that code.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By B on 11/1/2007 2:03:07 PM , Rating: 2
I second the 6 star nomination.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By erikejw on 11/2/2007 10:25:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think you deserve a sex just for cracking that code.
:)

FYP


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Symmetriad on 11/1/2007 2:12:37 PM , Rating: 2
Wow. Ever consider a career as a cryptographer?


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 2:26:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yea.... maybe someday I will persue that career path too.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By wordsworm on 11/1/2007 9:27:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm usually pretty good at translating but I have to admit defeat here. Can you re-post that, in something coherent?

Are you a dentist by trade, or a dentist's son?


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Spivonious on 11/1/2007 12:51:09 PM , Rating: 2
Computer hardware life is crap. NY* sold their souls to intel for x86/x64. Had they stayed with PowerPC we would have the PS3 flavored with OS X instead of old yellow.

*Not sure about the NY part, but I assume it means Apple?

Oh and stop posting from your cell phone so we can all readily understand you.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By HaZaRd2K6 on 11/1/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By ninjit on 11/1/2007 1:29:20 PM , Rating: 2
Holy crap!
SunAngel's average comment rating is 0.33!
Kudos, that has to take some serious effort.

We should have top 10 and bottom 10 charts for commentors on DT. That would be pretty interesting.

I think most of us have a pretty good idea who would be in the top 10, but not the bottom 10.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 2:25:20 PM , Rating: 2
You would be surprised. Those of us who post quite often are around the 2.0 mark. You will hover around 2.0 for most of the time, only trolls tend to slip below.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Mach Omega on 11/3/2007 11:35:31 PM , Rating: 1
Wow, kinda bitch-like. Everyone below 2.0 is automatically a troll. See credibility fly right out the Window.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By DeepBlue1975 on 11/1/2007 2:37:42 PM , Rating: 5
Lemme try, lemme try!!

See how my life is in the toilet!!! And while slaves are sold to Intel, 4 x86/x64 chips had they in a stadium with Power PC. We, the hive, Post Shit in 3 flavours. With OSX installed, universally all yell "R!".

Did I get it right? :D


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By mikefarinha on 11/1/2007 3:16:16 PM , Rating: 3
LOL,

Yes I think that is exactly what flows through SunAngels head.
Good Job!


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Superbike on 11/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: Vista's 2million mark
By amandahugnkiss on 11/1/2007 12:35:43 PM , Rating: 3
kinda hard to do that when you only support 4 or 5 hadware configurations. You think they'd be a bit better at shipping an OS with less bugs since they control the harware it runs on.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By Samus on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 7:52:38 PM , Rating: 2
Most large companies are going to be using Vista Enterprise.


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By SavagePotato on 11/2/2007 11:22:58 AM , Rating: 1
Hard drives are dying in five months because of Vista. That has to be the single most humorous vista fud attempt I have seen yet.

Have you ever considered the use that a hard disk in a database servers array sees in a 5 month period? You want to come in here and try to say something that unbelievably false and expect anyone to sit there and believe that nonsense?


RE: Vista's 2million mark
By AstroCreep on 11/1/2007 8:05:25 PM , Rating: 2
Gaging the sales numbers of new OSX's sales against Vista's sales would be kind of hard to do (not to mention a very "Apples to Oranges" comparison), seeing as how there are many companies/OEMs that sold OEM copies of Vista on new PCs, versus the the one single, solitary seller of OSX.


Seems like a nice operating system
By Martimus on 11/1/2007 12:46:00 PM , Rating: 2
It's too bad that I would need to buy Apple hardware to use it. It would be nice to have some choice in my operating system purchase that most software makers code for. OS X would be a nice option if I didn't have to buy an Apple made computer to go with it.




RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By mmntech on 11/1/2007 1:33:13 PM , Rating: 2
I have Leopard. It is nice but it runs slower than Tiger on my 1.33ghz iBook G4. Needs more memory too. At least 1gb. Also noticed a drop in battery life because it uses the GPU more.

Nothing wrong with Apple's hardware. Foxconn makes most of their motherboards, CPUs are Intel, GPUs are nVidia or ATI. Same stuff that's in PCs. The only problem some people will find is lack of upgradability. You can replace the CPU, HDD, and memory in consumer (Intel) systems but that's it. The MacPro can be upgraded/modded as any tower PC can but it's expensive.


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By Martimus on 11/1/2007 1:56:32 PM , Rating: 2
I don't want to buy an Apple computer. I like building my own. I enjoy knowing every component that is in the computer, and making the give and take decisions on what components I will purchase. I have this option when I build computers, but I really only have one option when I purchase an operating system. I was hoping that this could at least be a second option, but alas, it is not. Maybe that will change in the future.


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By Screwballl on 11/1/2007 3:05:27 PM , Rating: 2
There are 2 choices... too many people forget or choose not to go with the real alternative which in reality has much more power and usefulness than any MS/Mac OS around.


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By Martimus on 11/1/2007 3:16:17 PM , Rating: 2
Why don't you enlighten me on the two choices? I guess I could go with Windows XP or Vista, but I wanted an actual competitor to Microsoft. Linux is free, and thus not supported very well. It isn't an easy thing to get a Linux distribution up and running with proper drivers and have everything working on my PC.

I don't like a lot of things about Windows, but it is my only choice to be able to run the programs that I want to run. If I had another choice I could weigh the pros and cons of each and make a decision, but the only other choice I know of (Linux) isn't enough of a viable option for me to even consider it. I would love another well supported operating system come out to compete with Microsoft on the PC side, like Dr. DOS did in the 80's.


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By Runiteshark on 11/1/2007 4:41:53 PM , Rating: 2
What might that be?

As far as I've been able to tell, FreeBSD and Debian (the 2 I use) have kept up with pretty much any drivers around. The only exception is the crappy Nvidia or ATI drivers, but thats pretty much a given.

So can you enlighten me?


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By Martimus on 11/1/2007 5:43:36 PM , Rating: 2
Enlighten you with what?


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By omnicronx on 11/1/2007 6:37:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Linux is free, and thus not supported very well. It isn't an easy thing to get a Linux distribution up and running with proper drivers and have everything working on my PC.
That.. i have not had to configure anything but wireless and bluetooth for a few years in linux. In fact with my current setup on ubuntu 7.10 the only driver i had to install was the Nvidia driver, in which there is a gui installer built right into the OS to make things easier.
Nix has come a long way, and is much more supported than you think. Unless you are a gamer, nix is a viable solution for everyone. I have yet to find a windows program that i can not get running correctly with VMWARE or WINE.

As for the casual user, theres nothing you can't do in nix that you can do in OSX ;)


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By Martimus on 11/1/2007 7:35:11 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like you feel Ubuntu 7.10 doesn't have many operability issues. That is a good thing. I don't feel comfortable getting an operating system that doesn't have professional support. That generally means that new components will have issues for longer than other operating systems, because you are relying on the kindness of others to fix the issue, or do it yourself. I like Linux, and my college roommate always ran it on all of his computers (he used mine when he needed to use windows), but I don't want the steep learning curve to truly understand how to use it the way I want. Maybe it has changed since he was trying out a bunch of different distributions (I think FreeBSD was his favorite), but it was more work to get simple things like a CD writer to work properly than I want to spend. The biggest reason I don't think I will get Linux for a new computer (I may try it out on an old build) is that I buy higher quality components to play games. I don't need high quality components to surf the internet or write papers. Wideo drivers are known to be rather sketchy in Linux, because there are so many options when building your kernel (I think I said that right, but probably not). I have noticed that a few of the big PC game distributors are now releasing games at the same time for OS X and Windows, so OS X would have been another option for me if I could use it on my custom built computer and not an Apple built one. I would really just like a well supported operating system for x86 PC's other than Windows.


By aos007 on 11/2/2007 2:15:38 PM , Rating: 2
It is still sketchy, I'm afraid. For example, latest Suse 10.3 will install very well on an Intel Matrix Raid setup, coexisting nicely with Windows. But it will not configure properly the network driver (regular wired network) - you will have to manually download the driver from Realtek and compile the module, then install it over the old driver and fight with the network config software to make it work. And compiz-fusion will crash your system if you do something as innocent as shift-alt-Fn to a text console (happens every time).

Ubuntu 7.10 will recognize your network just fine, but it will not install on Intel Matrix Raid at all, unless you follow a how-to which will direct you to add dmraid module at install time (easy) and then manually override installation of grub (which will fail to install otherwise) - not simple at all. Grub setup is always arcane, especially when dealing with multiple drives, raid and windows, and worse, if you screw up, your entire machine will not be bootable - and fixing that will be really painful, or extremely difficult if you need special drivers at boot time (i.e. raid - if your live rescue system does not recognize it, you are SOL).

On the other hand, multimedia support has come a long a way and is exemplary now. No more manual recompiling of mplayer to get it to play your music or video off a SMB (windows share) partition. Even Apple lossless codec support can be had, in some software at least.


By T4RTER S4UCE on 11/1/2007 3:38:53 PM , Rating: 2
I build my desktops, but my laptops are always Macs.


RE: Seems like a nice operating system
By Hoser McMoose on 11/1/2007 3:58:03 PM , Rating: 5
Lack of upgradability and lack of choice are the real problems with Apple hardware. It's fine if you can afford the top of the line so you don't NEED to upgrade, but for us mere mortals it's a real downer.

Case in point, I'd like to get an Apple laptop, but I want at least a 15" screen (13" screens are REAL small). The cheapest laptop Apple sells with a 15" screen is $2000. I could find an IBM or Toshiba laptop that meets ALL my hardware needs for about $700 or $800, but to get it from Apple I need to get all sorts of other stuff I don't need in my laptop just to get a halfway decent sized screen.

Same goes on the desktop line, only 3 choices and two of them (Mac Mini and iMac) don't meet my needs, so it's the $2500 Mac Pro with all sorts of junk I don't need vs. any one of a million PCs that might sell for $1000 or so.

Even within their computer lines they often limit choice badly. Like if I wanted to get a Mac Mini with a DVD burner I would need to pay to upgrade the processor and hard drive as well.


By kelmon on 11/2/2007 11:19:40 AM , Rating: 2
The lack of choice is only a problem for some people. Personally, I think it's an over-blown topic since Apple's apparently selling tons of computers these days so this isn't an issue for a lot of people. Yes, there are those people who want more choice or to DIY but if the current model works then why break it? As with many things, Apple's trying to keep things simple with well-defined classes of products that don't tread on each other's toes much. However, I do agree that it would be nice to have at least a 15" screen on a non-pro model laptop.


By kelmon on 11/2/2007 11:53:27 AM , Rating: 2
You can see where the development effort went on Leopard - the focus this time was very much on the multi-core Intel machines. I've been doing testing on my old 1GHz G4 PowerBook and current Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro and the MacBook Pro pretty much flies with Leopard compared to Tiger. However, the old G4 seems to hold up pretty well so I'm not complaining much on that one, although the XBench scores are down about 20% on the G4 (slightly up on the MacBook Pro) from Tiger. It all comes down to the feel of the system in real-life rather than the numbers generated by benchmarks.


Leopard.. it's so hip and cool.
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 12:28:17 PM , Rating: 2
Well when you put Linux that way..... where do I find her.. ;)


RE: Leopard.. it's so hip and cool.
By theapparition on 11/1/2007 12:28:54 PM , Rating: 2
I'd do linux


RE: Leopard.. it's so hip and cool.
By T4RTER S4UCE on 11/1/2007 3:34:56 PM , Rating: 2
Wait a second. That's a vague comment, do mean the OS or the
chick.
PS: NO WOMEN USE LINUX


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 4:19:04 PM , Rating: 2
The chick of course.


By Spivonious on 11/1/2007 12:55:54 PM , Rating: 3
That video was pretty good, but they missed the part where you put on the new jacket and then find out that it only has the left sleeve, so you have to get another jacket that only has the right sleeve and then get a stapler to attach the two.


RE: Leopard.. it's so hip and cool.
By Screwballl on 11/1/2007 1:27:50 PM , Rating: 2
then theres #3 in the series:
http://cdn.novell.com/cached/video/bs_07/mac_pc_li...
or the original: http://youtube.com/watch?v=cldeHjFig_c
Love the Vista Clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxOIebkmrqs

as much as I hate youtube, its at least useful for something


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 3:00:44 PM , Rating: 2
The only reason I go to Youtube is to watch the old G1 Transformers Episodes that someone so kindly posted ;)


Mac Gaming?
By ninjit on 11/1/2007 1:25:29 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
(though Mac may soon be getting serious gaming capabilities of its own)


Can you elaborate on that statement Jason?
Were you referring to EA's recent re-entry into the Mac games market?




RE: Mac Gaming?
By afkrotch on 11/2/2007 7:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
Yep, can't wait to see OSX support DX10 or even DX9. Bwah ha ha ha!!!

Even better, the piss poor vidcard offerings on a Mac. LOL!!!


Bugs Galore
By kelmon on 11/2/2007 11:43:04 AM , Rating: 2
I'm just finishing up my review of Leopard after testing it pretty intensively for the past week and there's 2 major comments that come out of it (I've not read other reviews yet so I don't know what everyone else thinks):

1. There are some really great features in Leopard that make using a computer much more enjoyable.

2. There are some bugs present in the great new feature that will really piss you off.

My biggest gripe is with Spaces. Spaces, in concept and mostly in practice, is a great feature for helping you to manage with window-overload since you can easily get to the point where even Exposé can't help you as well as you'd like. Splitting work across multiple desktops makes a lot of sense and it'd damned handy in practice. The problem is that you can be switched to another Space without warning and applications can get confused when documents are open in different Spaces.

My other major issue is with iChat Theatre since it just doesn't work. I have no idea how Apple put together their demos of showing off Keynote presentations via iChat but when I tried it with another MacBook Pro over a LAN the image quality of the presentation was so poor that the viewer can't read it at all. However, I'm less bothered about this since I'm unlikely to use this feature much whereas I expect to be using Spaces day-in, day-out.

Anyway, great OS but crappy polish. I highly recommend people to wait on this release unless they absolutely have to have it now. This goes doubly for those of you looking to try it on non-Apple hardware. Wait until around January and the the first point updates have been released.




RE: Bugs Galore
By SavagePotato on 11/2/2007 1:12:45 PM , Rating: 1
I really get a kick out of how Apple shows off the spaces feature as some amazing thing they are no doubt planning to take full credit for inventing. When of course Linux is the origin of multiple desktops and has been for a very long time.

Then again thats textbook apple, Copy a feature and claim to have invented it.


RE: Bugs Galore
By kelmon on 11/4/2007 10:36:30 AM , Rating: 2
Not to rain on your pride but multiple desktops was first pioneered on Xerox's Rooms application in the mid 1980's, around the same time as GNU was started and definitely before Linux. In this respect Linux is as guilty of copying as Apple so you might want to step back from that statement in the future.


Unbrick vs Jailbreak (Unlock File System)
By odiHnaD on 11/1/2007 12:03:04 PM , Rating: 2
"...exploits a safari TIFF vulnerability to unbrick iPhones and iPod Touches and allow them to install third party applications."

I think the proper term would have been "Jailbreak" or "Unlock File System" as the Jailbreak method on its own can't unbrick an iPhone and as far as I know there haven't been any widespread bricking issues with the iPod touch.




By PandaBear on 11/1/2007 12:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
either way, it is good that it is unbricked and the free market wins once again.


Proper mac upgrade
By Screwballl on 11/1/2007 2:15:09 PM , Rating: 2
This video says it all:

http://tv.truenuff.com/mac/os.php




RE: Proper mac upgrade
By T4RTER S4UCE on 11/1/2007 3:50:59 PM , Rating: 2
I seriously get tired of True Nuff films.


Nice Kitty
By cheetah2k on 11/2/2007 12:46:02 AM , Rating: 2
In the article picture....

Is that Leopard Roaring, or Yawning??




I've never commented before but...
By eboku on 11/4/2007 10:54:46 AM , Rating: 1
I swear, this site turns into such an immature bitch fest whenever Apple is mentioned.




Great
By XToneX on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: Great
By Spivonious on 11/1/2007 12:53:07 PM , Rating: 4
OMG HACK EXPLOITS ALREADY FOR LEOPARD!?!? HAHAHA OWNED


RE: Great
By bhieb on 11/1/2007 1:14:36 PM , Rating: 2
LOL beat me to it.

Seriously though for years Apple has claimed it is far more secure, and for years everyone (at least those in IT) knew it was only because there was not a big enough install base. Now the install base is not really that big, but motivation this time came from hackers who just want to use it on better hardware. Necessity is the mother of all invention after all.

Lets face it the internet is a very hostile environmenet, and any OS will have it's faults quickly revealed. The question is how quickly do they fix the problem, and both Apple and MS are pretty good.

To me it is a bit of a joke "hack" after all the tight integration with hardware is what makes apple great. I own and HTC Kaiser (tilt), and although it is a great phone, the fluidity of the iPhone puts it to shame. With the HTC it sometimes stalls waiting on the processor you can tell they wrote the software, then paired it up with the hardware. The iPhone was obviously desinged with the hardware and software guys working very close together. The thing just works flawlessly. To me that is why you buy and apple, not so you can go messing around with the hardware, and most likely foul up the Zen that is Apple engineering.


RE: Great
By T4RTER S4UCE on 11/1/2007 3:47:15 PM , Rating: 1
I love to hear people give explanations as to why Macs have less viruses, because all that is, is another reason TO buy a Mac


RE: Great
By Hoser McMoose on 11/1/2007 4:15:43 PM , Rating: 2
Does anyone still get viruses on PCs? I can't remember the last time I got one, it certainly wasn't in the last 5 years and probably not even in the last 10 years. For most of that time I didn't have a virus scanner either.

Amazing how, regardless of what OS you run, the best anti-virus "program" is still called "Common Sense", also known as "Don't Be an Idiot".


RE: Great
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 4:22:09 PM , Rating: 2
The lines of "Virus" and "Spyware" have long since blurred. In modern times we simply call it "Malware". Malware is still present, just IT guys tend not to find it, unless they are trying to browse "free adult sites".


RE: Great
By nitrous9200 on 11/1/2007 5:02:10 PM , Rating: 2
Finally, someone that gets it!


RE: Great
By Runiteshark on 11/1/2007 4:44:49 PM , Rating: 2
Hey T4rter, how about I give you explanations on how practically any BSD or Linux variant never gets viruses.

But that would take all the fun out of it huh? When you use a security model that doesn't suck for some odd reason you are more secure.

Plus its not like Macs don't run a ton of open source stuff anyway, like Samba, Apache, etc..

Don't they claim that stuff as their own to a degree?


RE: Great
By bhieb on 11/1/2007 4:55:21 PM , Rating: 2
That is definately true as long as it overcomes the reasons NOT TO buy a mac. Mainly back office compatibility and gaming. Other than that they are a very well engineered product.

However the "safer" factor is solely related to popularity, not by Apple design regardless of what the hype says. Just about anything can be hacked, it's just whether or not the hackers find it worth their time. MS makes a better target, but with the way Apple has been treating their user base lately I would not be suprised if the hacking community doesn't come after them more often. Especially in cases like this where it is for the "good of the user".


so wait...
By michal1980 on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: so wait...
By themadmilkman on 11/1/2007 12:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
Good luck on those monopoly charges. Unless you can somehow convince the courts that Macs are a separate market outside of PCs in general, the charges will never stick until Apple holds a majority of the market AND uses that position to drive out competition.


RE: so wait...
By omnicronx on 11/1/2007 2:18:43 PM , Rating: 2
Apple all but banned MACOSX from working on PC's. It's only through hacks and clever driver rewrites that it is possible to run OSX on a PC. That sounds like a separate market to me.

The OP is right though, once apple gets any significant marketshare (my guess is 20%+) they could presumably fall under the same rules as Microsoft.

Microsoft did not get in trouble because they had the market cornered, they got in trouble mostly for limiting what other software makers can do on their O/S.. such as Google's index search, vista cripples it and it does not work properly, so the courts ordered MS to create a workaround for Google and to have the ability to turn MS's feature off. Other example is MS having to sell a copy of Windows in europe that does not contain Internet explorer.

You would think apple would have to follow the same rules.
Even right now, it would be risky for Apple to do something such as only allow Safari as the web browser and would probably fall under the same rules as MS


RE: so wait...
By themadmilkman on 11/1/2007 4:40:49 PM , Rating: 2
No, that is not a separate market. Would you seriously say that Windows XP and Windows Vista are separate markets because software can potentially run on one that does not run on the other? The same thing with Windows and Linux. They are part of the Personal Computer market.

Because it is not a separate market, the remainder of your argument is moot.


RE: so wait...
By omnicronx on 11/1/2007 6:31:21 PM , Rating: 2
You compared 3 things, all of which have always run on any computer with x86 hardware. Your comparisons are moot because you did not bring apple into the equation. You can run windows, linux or unix off of pretty much any flavor of x86 hardware you can think of. Computers that do not meet the minimum requirements for a new OS do not count either, as if they were fast enough, they would still be compatible will all 3 O/S flavors.

Apple on the otherhand has a closed OS that was specifically designed not to be usable on 'x86' PC's. Until they adopted intel processors of course, but apple still does not support MACOSX for x86 pc's.

Furthermore, if you need to be a 'closed' market to be susceptible to these rules, how does windows count in the first place, they are not in a separate market, they co-exist with linux and unix all of which is usable on the same hardware.

Moral of the story is, you do not have to be as big of a company as Microsoft to be subject to monopolistic rules. Apple would fall under the same boat if they had more marketshare. Hell MS would be breathing down their throats about stuff like this the second apple even comes close to parity in the market(not going to happen though) ;)

btw x86 = ibm's definition of x86 (apple is technically x86 also)


RE: so wait...
By rklaver on 11/1/2007 1:28:57 PM , Rating: 3
So when you download your service pack from Microsoft are you getting upgraded to 64bit code, refreshed interface, refined frameworks, and new software utilities? I would like the link to your sp upgrade please.

Also the apps you speak of which you claim "...apple packs in" are only included with the purchase of a mac and are not included with the OS.


RE: so wait...
By T4RTER S4UCE on 11/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: so wait...
By aos007 on 11/1/07, Rating: 0
RE: so wait...
By ghost101 on 11/1/2007 2:02:01 PM , Rating: 2
Of course, you can change the motherboard on your mac all the time as a computer enthusiast.

Dont compare oranges to apples. The argument you used cant even be applied to macs so why arent OEM copies sufficient?


RE: so wait...
By helios220 on 11/1/2007 2:11:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Dont compare oranges to apples. The argument you used cant even be applied to macs so why arent OEM copies sufficient?


You basically made that statement to the wrong person. The argument he used was to counter the original post of this thread that Vista is some model of great value. If you want to complain about comparing Vista to Mac OS go up a few posts to the person who actually made the comparison rather than the commentary.


RE: so wait...
By omnicronx on 11/1/2007 2:25:06 PM , Rating: 2
300$ to upgrade? what are you smoking, Microsoft.com offers a downloadable upgrade for 159.95, and also has the option to buy and ship it to yourself from anywhere between 118-167. That leads me to believe they are selling oem versions right there on the site.
quote:
http://www.windowsmarketplace.com/details.aspx?vie...

Vista Premium is useless to most users, and there is nothing missing from home premium that MacOSX has. (except for maybe shadowcopying, i am not sure)

I did not have to search hard either, i merely typed 'windows vista upgrade' in google.


RE: so wait...
By aos007 on 11/1/2007 4:13:24 PM , Rating: 2
What am *I* smoking? Have you read anything I said? I DON'T want OEM because I can't upgrade my hardware. I need retail. And retail is $300, right here:

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?lo...

Prices go down by 20-30 bucks sometimes but then there's 13% tax which would bring it around $300 anyway. So yes, it IS 300 bucks.

And I'm not "most users", I work in IT and I clearly said I need the business features such as remote desktop. Only Ultimate makes sense to me.


RE: so wait...
By omnicronx on 11/1/2007 6:51:28 PM , Rating: 2
First off, thats ultimate, The only thing useful OSX has over Vista is its new backup tool, which most people will not use anyways. So lets compare apples to apples here, Vista Home premium to OSX 10.5 Leopard. As for your business features, RDP is the only difference, but wait, apple doesn't have an RDP equivalent, gosh goly. Of course both OSX and Windows have 3rd party applications to do the same thing, I am not going to tell you what you don't want to hear.

quote:
DON'T want OEM because I can't upgrade my hardware.
Now is this you can't upgrade your hardware because you physically can't or is it the OEM SOFTWARE IS TIED TO THE ORIGINAL HARDWARE BS? Your story is a bunch of excuses, you could get vista home premium, you could also get oem, you just don't want too. So how about you leave you bias opinions out of this forum, as your situation is far from that of 99% of other people out there..

P.S OEM hardware upgrade limitations mean much less when you buy it directly from Microsoft, they do not know what hardware you are currently using like an oem manufacturers disk that comes with your PC. Otherwise the only difference is the manuals and the fancy box.. I don't know about you but you have to be pretty stupid to pay $150 for a few pieces of paper.


RE: so wait...
By aos007 on 11/2/2007 1:36:56 PM , Rating: 2
While I will concede that many people will not need Vista ultimate, OEM software IS tied to original hardware (including Microsoft OEM disks bought from computer stores). I am speaking from personal experience. And it's a well known fact that was covered here and everywhere else ad nauseum. This isn't a recipe site, this is a technical site and people who visit here are likely to upgrade their motherboards and CPUs. If they do, they run a real risk of their OEM reactivation failing. And it's not a 1 in a million chance either.

And don't tell me that I just "don't want to" buy Vista. In fact I will buy that retail Ultimate I linked today or this weekend as a new flyer came out last night and it just fell to $250, the lowest it's been yet. What I don't want to is have people lead to believe that they should buy OEM version for their self-built PCs if they are planning on doing frequent upgrades. Not unless they're comfortable in either lying over the phone or using hacks to reactivate. But I'm sure most people already know this. This has been covered to death already when Vista came out. I don't have the problem with people doing that at all, but I do have problem with people making it sound like it doesn't matter. It may not matter to general public that buys an OS with a new machine, and only then. It does matter to most people reading this site (and Anandtech). And it's definitely a factor when deciding a monetary worth of an OS.

And I even factored in the value of the workaround that lets you use the upgrade retail version without rendering your old OS (XP) license worthless. Should I factor in the FULL non-upgrade price? Because whether you like it or not, each Mac OS upgrade that you Microsoft employees refer to as "service pack" is effectively a full (non-upgrade) retail version.


RE: so wait...
By helios220 on 11/1/2007 2:02:12 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know if a lot of people simply have retail PC's with OS's preinstalled or maybe they just like spending money, but last time I posted about how expensive Vista can be I got a -1 rating.

Despite all of the flavors of Vista that are out there, if you want a full feature set comparable to XP Professional and you don't want your XP license to be consumed you don't have a whole lot of options that don't end in shelling out $300 dollars.

I currently have an System Builder OEM version of Vista Ultimate and despite the fact that it was under $200 it was a giant mistake. The license is virtually worthless in terms of any upgrade path and there is no migration path from 32 bit to 64 bit.

I'm not a Mac user and $100 for a glorified service pack may indeed be a raw deal, but Vista is no model of how things should be.


RE: so wait...
By michal1980 on 11/1/2007 4:26:19 PM , Rating: 1
no o.s. license is perfect

But to relate a 100 dollar SP to a full new O.S. is just bunk.

from my favorite semi-accurate source:

SP2 adds new functionality to Windows XP, including an enhanced firewall, improved Wi-Fi support with a wizard utility, a pop-up ad blocker for Internet Explorer, and Bluetooth support. Security enhancements include a major revision to the included firewall which was renamed to Windows Firewall and is enabled by default, advanced memory protection that takes advantage of the NX bit that is incorporated into newer processors to stop some forms of buffer overflow attacks, and removal of raw socket support (which supposedly limits the damage done by zombie machines). Additionally, security-related improvements were made to e-mail and web browsing. Windows XP Service Pack 2 includes the Windows Security Center, which provides a general overview of security on the system, including the state of anti-virus software, Windows Update, and the new Windows Firewall. Third-party anti-virus and firewall applications can interface with the new Security Center.

some of the 300 updates to OSx include new fonts. ohh woow new fonts.


RE: so wait...
By ebernet on 11/1/2007 7:45:41 PM , Rating: 3
I had to reply....
Why don't you go read something like Ars to get an idea of what Leopard really is. I am sick of seeing people calling 10.5 a SP. Among other things, 10.5 gives you:

All new underlying APIs for text, graphics, video, File System events, user account management
New UI widgets in the APIs
New developer tools and frameworks
All new 64 bit accross the board

Yeah, if all you read is the marketing speak of the 300 features, you might think it is window dressing, but even there there is more exploration. This site is called daily tech - why don't people read up on what they write about?

Apple issues 10 SP for Tiger over the 2.5 years it was out. They also released OS X for Intel, OS X for Apple TV, and OS X for ARM (iPhone) over that time.

Apple issues a single OS with both 64 and 32 bit, PowerPC and Intel code, and all the drivers needed for making your Mac into a PC. All on the same DVD (yes, a single autorun that installs Windows drivers for EVERY SINGLE Intel Mac Model and EVERY SINGLE feature on theose models [camera, Infrared remote, backlit keyboard, etc.] in 10.5)

If you ask me, that is a boatload of bang for your money, and to call that nothing but a SP is not just being dishonest, but exctremely ignorant....


RE: so wait...
By rippleyaliens on 11/1/2007 4:35:48 PM , Rating: 2
$320 for Vista Ultimate
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
For a OS that will last 4+ years that isnt bad per day for it.
$0.22 cents a day for the OS over a 4 year period.
In 4 years, i will easily spend over $5000 in computer upgrades, mem, cpu, ram, etc... not to mention the $300 in games. PER YEAR So the cost is high, but we are all spoiled on the cheap OS's...
Linux is free, but it is like free beer versus free air. Free beer has a cost in it as well..hehe..
Mac OS, WELL no matter how great the MAC is, and how wonderful it is , How much is the software for it?
How much are games for it? What is the premium you pay for the all white MAC box, versus a Wintel Box. WORSE.. When the Mac crashes, and they do..(Hardware, os, etc..) HOW much does it cost to fix?
You want to upgrade it, good luck, finding the parts for it, without a Stupid price jump for it.
NEXT year when the new MAC's come out (hardware refresh?), i guess you throw away your MAC for a new one. All this means is that cost is relative. With a WinTel box you know that it will be a while.. before refresh, and at worst, the refresh is just a rinsed version of what you have.

VISTA staying power, welllllll considering that Win2k8 server, is VISTA (server version,) as 2000 pro was to 2000 server, and xp was to 2k3.. (yes i have installed win2k8)
So cost to the OS is just a smallll price to the overall price for the computer. ATLEAST Microsoft is consistent in their things. AS my new CORE2QUAD machine will still run win2k on it, (FAST AS FUZZKK) and here we are 2 months away from 2008.. MAC wellll right, good luck with that one.


RE: so wait...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/1/2007 2:57:24 PM , Rating: 3
I've changed my motherboard twice now on my Vista 64 OEM. I just call Microsoft and they reactivate me. Haven't had them complain once.


RE: so wait...
By helios220 on 11/1/2007 4:25:29 PM , Rating: 2
I'll readily admit that my opinion of Vista OEM is based off of personal experience and is accordingly biased. While some may have had great experience with it, I have not.

At the time of purchasing Vista I was running an x86 system and bought an 32-bit OEM version of Vista Ultimate, which was even more practical at the time due to the driver concerns many expressed with x64 Vista. I have since upgraded to an x64 processor and 4 gigs of ram. Vista only recognizes 3 gigs of ram (fault of 32-bit OS not Vista specifically). For retail versions of Vista that's no big deal, pop in the DVD or at worst order the alternate media from Microsoft for the shipping fee. For OEM buyers, Microsoft told me to go buy the retail version or go shove it in more polite words.

Hell, I'm not even trying to complain, I'll get over it. I just want to warn other DIY system builders of the limitations of OEM as many users may actually want the ability to switch back and forth between 64 or 32 bit versions depending on your needs of driver availability or address space.


RE: so wait...
By mikefarinha on 11/2/2007 11:28:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I just want to warn other DIY system builders of the limitations of OEM as many users may actually want the ability to switch back and forth between 64 or 32 bit versions depending on your needs of driver availability or address space.


The way you say this implies that 'many DIY builders' will want to switch between 32-bit and 64-bit on a whim. Only a masochist would want to do that. One can't simply insert a Vista 64-bit CD and upgrade from Vista 32-bit. It will initiate a fresh install of the new OS.

The smart DIY builder will do his homework and pick the proper OS for his system and stick to it. (Actually the smart DIY builder would build a system around the 64-bit OS, unless there is something critical that he needs that wont run in the 32-bit emulation mode.)

You have problems if you buy a windows Vista CD with the intent to go back and forth between 32-bit and 64-bit. That would not be a very productive endeavor.


RE: so wait...
By SavagePotato on 11/2/2007 1:14:38 PM , Rating: 1
I think what this fellow may have been referring to was setting up a dual boot situation with both versions of the os.


RE: so wait...
By aos007 on 11/1/2007 4:31:53 PM , Rating: 2
Good for you. My experience with XP is that it worked a few times - first few times online, later I had to call in and got the automated system which let me activate, and then one day it just didn't let me change reactivate at all - they simply tell you (an automated recording) that you have to buy a new license, and that's the end of that. You don't even get to talk to a live person - nor would I want to since you're consciously violating the license.

I am sure they have a counter somewhere, you'll get a few extra activations but if you upgrade often enough you will eventually run out of goodwill from the Microsoft.

I am not going to pay $200 (170 on sale plus tax up here North) just to have that worry every time I upgrade.
It's a violation of license, there's no obligation for them to let me upgrade and it all simmers down to luck. And the luck will run out eventually. Yes I know, there are hacks to avoid activation. But if it comes to that, then why are we discussing the price in the first place?


RE: so wait...
By rippleyaliens on 11/1/2007 4:43:07 PM , Rating: 2
The KEY to the re-activiation ISSSSSS.....
1- Get to the live person
2- When they ask something, your answer is this
a. Hard drive crashed had to re-install
b. Virus- Had to preform re-install
c. Spyware problem, had to re-install
d. The KILLER- the pc maker (dell, hp, etc..) had me do a bio update, or firmware update, and now Windows will not work at all, so had to re-install.

ALL Valid reason, and all reason, taht Microsoft knows happens, and effects Windows. Done this MANY!!!! times.
Evan had a upper level rep ask me what the problem is and i gave them plan zulu..
I am studying for MCSE, and i have been tinkering with the system, in order to better learn the product.
Exactly what can they say??- NOTHING


RE: so wait...
By helios220 on 11/1/2007 5:37:53 PM , Rating: 1
The fact of the matter is you shouldn't have to try weasel your way through everything, you shouldn't be treated like crap in the first place just because you 'only' paid $170 for your license.

The OEM license is provided as is without support because it was mostly intended to be bought by PC resellers or other larger entities that would be providing some form of support for the end-user. Those excuses do work in some situations and I have used them in the past, but for some situations Microsoft has bluntly told me that it's the reseller’s problem and not theirs. What, you didn't buy a PC from Dell? Oh well I guess it's your problem then, have a nice day.

This debate has devolved on quite a tangent, but I suppose to surmise back to the original point let me state bluntly: I am not an Apple fan or user; I don't have OSXXX 10.69 SexPanther or whatever the f@*k they want to call it. It may be and/or probably is a giant rip-off.

All I'm saying is that Microsoft blissfully satisfactory support or pricing either. As a legitimate paying customer I'd just like to get a little bit more muscle in the license I paid for, but then there are a lot of things I'd 'like'.

That's just life I suppose.


RE: so wait...
By michal1980 on 11/1/2007 8:42:34 PM , Rating: 3
then buy a retail version.

wheres that oem os.x I can buy? oh wait. you dont have that choice


RE: so wait...
By MangoSRT8 on 11/5/2007 8:48:46 AM , Rating: 2
Because they don't need it. The entire new OS is the price of "O.E.M" Vista or winblows junk.

Or are you just too cheap to pay for good products.....


RE: so wait...
By SavagePotato on 11/2/2007 1:24:20 PM , Rating: 1
I guess you just can't have your cake and eat it too. The OEM is cheaper for a reason. Trying to find reasons to fault Microsoft for offering a cheaper product with specific limitations, and then not wanting to have to abide by those limitations is fruitless.

I reload quite a few computers with OEM licenses and have had to call the Microsoft activation many many times. As a matter of fact, I just finished doing so on a Vista system I swapped a dead motherboard out on which triggered the activation. I have never had a problem doing so, Sometimes the agent has not even bothered to give the standard, "is this the first time activating the software, and how many other pc's is this software installed on" questionnaire.


RE: so wait...
By ted61 on 11/1/2007 7:48:48 PM , Rating: 2
Just buy yourself a cheap PC with vista for $200. Put linux on that PC then use the vista code for your good PC. Now you have a computer with Vista and a new linux toy to play with.

Problem solved.


"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki