Vista is love. Office 2007 is love.

[Asher]

Installed Vista final last night, along with Office 2007 final. Very impressive stuff, IMO. Got a lot of things right. :b:

What's most impressive to me is the mixture of eyecandy with functionality. Aqua is pretty on OS X, but at the same time isn't very functional nor customizable. A lot of little things make life a lot easier, such as seeing live thumbnails of windows when you mouse over them in the taskbar.

The "WindowFlip" feature is more usable than OS X's Expose because it maps both the visuals of the windows with a stack that allows you to sort by last-used. Expose simply resizes and tiles windows across your screen, so you lose the time aspect of which windows are "most" active, while Flip will always put the active windows at the front.

The UI is most certainly a lot more responsive than it was in XP, across the board.

Media sharing is extremely easy across networks. It instantly detected my Xbox 360 on the network and configured it for streaming of music, video, and photos from my computer.

The new Explorer interface permits far faster file handling. I love the "breadcrumb" address bar, and allows me to snap back to a specific parent directory with ease.

The sidebar is really cool, especially on a widescreen monitor. A more polished version of Google Desktops, which I'd used previously. And far less obtrusive and chaotic than Dashboard is on OS X (although can be customized to work the same annoying way).

Windows Media Centre is gorgeous and very functional for bigscreen TV use. Going to get myself a long DVI cable and hook my 42" 1920x1080 HDTV to my PC to use the media centre functionality, probably instead of my DVR (a Scientific Atlanta...fugly POS). Can use the Firewire port on the box to control the dual HDTV tuners and record shows.

Love the application-specific audio volume. Built-in Dolby Digital decoder is a nice touch.

Speech recognition is <b>way</b> more accurate than I expected, though not something I see myself using on a regular basis.

Used my dual-channel 2GB flash drive in "ReadyBoost" mode, and there's definitely a noticable performance boost for most-used applications in startup time.

Windows Update is now a standalone application. Goodbye, IE!

Built-in support for junctions, hard links, and symbolic links. About time.

More to come with more impressions later.

[Jaakko]

How's the DRM? I bet your beloved high definition will look just awesome after it's ran through a constrictor in next gen video cards!

[aneeshm]

I want to know more about Vista, which will tell me whether or not the switch is worth it. Just a simple question - can it compete in eyecandy with the latest Beryl?

[LordShiva]

Media Centre is perhaps the only part of Vista that I absolutely loathe.

[Kuciwalker]

The "WindowFlip" feature is more usable than OS X's Expose because it maps both the visuals of the windows with a stack that allows you to sort by last-used.

Didn't you complain about stack-based tabs in Opera? And didn't you even say that the stack-based nature of alt-tab was a mistake?

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Jaakko
How's the DRM? I bet your beloved high definition will look just awesome after it's ran through a constrictor in next gen video cards!

That, too. How serious is this issue?

[DinoDoc]

How odd. Asher likes a MS product. Someone stop the presses.

[Jon Miller]

What are the requirements?

I have a M405 that I would consider upgrading for Windows Vista (it says Vista compatible, but it is about 1 year old).

JM

[Oerdin]

Any way to remove it?

[Kuciwalker]

Asher: Do you have it through a corporate license or something? I thought it wasn't coming out until Jan 31 - I want :(

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Jaakko
How's the DRM? I bet your beloved high definition will look just awesome after it's ran through a constrictor in next gen video cards!

Y'know, Linux is pretty much the only OS won't be burdened by DRM. That said, you also won't be able to watch the HD unless it's cracked or has some workaround.

But yeah, sure, go ahead. Smack Microsoft around over that, when it's not their insistence that brings this stuff around.

[Asher]

Office 2007 now (which I've used in beta form for ~1 year).

<b>Excel</b>
Conditional formatting rules!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e7/Databar.PNG

Sexy graphs. Again, about time. Looks way more professional.

Up to 1,048,576 rows and 16,384 columns.

PivotTables support hierarchical data now! yay.

User-defined functions! And they can be multithreaded. Mucho coolo.

Formulae are multithreaded for huge performance increases on complex functions on dualcore+ systems.

<b>Word</b>

Better spell (well, grammar) checker -- now takes into account more context. Common example: "I think we will <em>loose</em> this battle"

Building Blocks -- for those times where I find myself copy/pasting the same thing then modifying it. Now I can save a mini-template and insert it.

<b>WAY</b> improved mathematical equation support (TeX-like)

Automatic bibliographic/citation generation engine (APA, etc. Extensively used last year in school, very useful)

"Gallery" support...mouse over options to see them applied instantly to the document as a preview.

<b>Outlook</b>

Email is now indexed for instant-search capabilities (results as you type in each letter of a search)

Most of the other changes are collaboration-related, which i haven't had a chance to play with yet. Work rolls it out soon with Exchange 2007, so we'll see.

<b>OneNote</b>

Share notebooks across multiple computers. Very very useful for group meetings.

OCR is automagically performed on all images (screen captures, scans, handwriting, etc) and indexed as searchable.

Table support! Finally.

Can embed Word, PDF, and other docs <em>inside</em> OneNote which you can use to liberally annotate

OneNote Mobile for use on SmartPhones and Windows Mobile devices -- realtime sync over wireless or sync on connect.

<b>Others</b>
Haven't used the others much. SharePoint '07 is supposedly kickass.

[Nostromo]

What are the requirements?

I have a M405 that I would consider upgrading for Windows Vista (it says Vista compatible, but it is about 1 year old).


Download the Vista upgrade advisor. It'll tell if your computer is up to the task.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Jaakko
How's the DRM? I bet your beloved high definition will look just awesome after it's ran through a constrictor in next gen video cards!

Do you mean HDCP support? I'm not a fan of it, of course, but it's something I'm already used to on my DVR and TV...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Didn't you complain about stack-based tabs in Opera? And didn't you even say that the stack-based nature of alt-tab was a mistake?
On their own, they are a mistake. Read what I wrote regarding why it's an improvement in Vista, and it's not because it's stack-based (which was already true with alt-tab).

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
What are the requirements?

I have a M405 that I would consider upgrading for Windows Vista (it says Vista compatible, but it is about 1 year old).

JM

Supposedly only 5% of the PCs out there are capable of running Vista and even if you can upgrade you still won't get better performance in most cases. You'll end up with Vista when you buy a new computer but likely won't upgrade your existing one.

[Asher]

Originally posted by aneeshm
That, too. How serious is this issue?

Hilariously overblown. I haven't been restricted in anything I do yet, so if DRM is going to be the death of me I think I'd notice it by now in Vista.

[Nubclear]

I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Asher: Do you have it through a corporate license or something? I thought it wasn't coming out until Jan 31 - I want :(
I got it through work, yes. It's available to MSDN subscribers...

As of January 3rd it's also available for free to students whose school is part of the MSDN Academic Alliance. CM is a big CS school, shouldn't they be a member of it?

You can also acquire it through other means...*cough*

There's cracks out there...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Supposedly only 5% of the PCs out there are capable of running Vista and even if you can upgrade you still won't get better performance in most cases. You'll end up with Vista when you buy a new computer but likely won't upgrade your existing one.
It runs better than XP on my 3-year old PC...

I have an Athlon 64 3200+ w/ 2GB RAM & GeForce 7800GS.

[Kuciwalker]

As of January 3rd it's also available for free to students whose school is part of the MSDN Academic Alliance. CM is a big CS school, shouldn't they be a member of it?

:eek: I shall investigate this.

[aneeshm]

I'll ask again - how does the eyecandy compare with the latest Beryl?

[Solver]

I won't be saying anything about Vista for now.

However, I have to say that I'm hearing only the good things about Office 2007. Asher, what's bad about Office 2007? Is it true that your average user would have a considerable learning curve?

User-defined functions! And they can be multithreaded. Mucho coolo.

What's new, other than multithreading? You could code your own functions since, well, some really old version...

Formulae are multithreaded for huge performance increases on complex functions on dualcore+ systems.

The general idea of multithreading formulae, though, kicks ass.

WAY improved mathematical equation support (TeX-like)

TeX incompatible, though, I assume?

I'm really curious about Office 2007, might want to give it an install on the Windows partition. Office is what I like the most about MS products. I'm more than satisfied with Linux as an OS, but will be the first to admit that office software there is lacking - and I'm comparing to MS Office XP. AbiWord/GnuCash are a very good Word/Excel replacement if you only need the basic features, they can't do most of what Word and Excel can. OpenOffice.org is fairly good, I find that I can also use some of the advanced features painlessly, but it has more than a fair share of problems, and still some lacking functionality.

[Asher]

Originally posted by aneeshm
I'll ask again - how does the eyecandy compare with the latest Beryl?
I haven't used Beryl, but from the reviews I've read and impressions I've read, Beryl's a very simple juvenile implementation of a 3D-accelerated desktop...complete with dizzying cube-rotation "special effects" like that stupid Firefox extension. Unpolished and overdone comes to mind.

[Jaakko]

Originally posted by Q Cubed


Y'know, Linux is pretty much the only OS won't be burdened by DRM. That said, you also won't be able to watch the HD unless it's cracked or has some workaround.

But yeah, sure, go ahead. Smack Microsoft around over that, when it's not their insistence that brings this stuff around.

Yeah, I'm sure Microsoft had no choice but to include ironclad support for the most invasive DRM schemes on earth. Right down to driver de-authentification in case of "suspected premium content security risks", ie. pray Windows doesn't think your video content looks like it's pirated.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
I won't be saying anything about Vista for now.

However, I have to say that I'm hearing only the good things about Office 2007. Asher, what's bad about Office 2007? Is it true that your average user would have a considerable learning curve?

The bad thing about it is the interface is different and there's no way to revert to the old style. There's a learning curve, but I don't consider it considerable at all. The interface is far more intuitive now than before.

What's new, other than multithreading? You could code your own functions since, well, some really old version...
Sorry, left this too vague. You can now implement UDF in .NET as well. They can also be server-side, for example a company can define a library of UDF for its users and the latest version will be hosted on the company's intranet server.

TeX incompatible, though, I assume?
The output is saved in Word files or XML, so yeah. Since the XML file format is completely open, it shouldn't take much for a conversion tool if people wanted that.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Solver
what's bad about Office 2007? Is it true that your average user would have a considerable learning curve?

The ribbon interface takes some getting used to, and clients who use a previous version of Office will need to download some sort of translator.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher

I haven't used Beryl, but from the reviews I've read and impressions I've read, Beryl's a very simple juvenile implementation of a 3D-accelerated desktop...complete with dizzying cube-rotation "special effects" like that stupid Firefox extension. Unpolished and overdone comes to mind.

Beryl is better than that, highly customizable, too. Though I don't dig cube rotation myself. The good thing about Beryl is that it also provides good eye candy on somewhat older video cards.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Jaakko
Yeah, I'm sure Microsoft had no choice but to include ironclad support for the most invasive DRM schemes on earth. Right down to driver de-authentification in case of "suspected premium content security risks", ie. pray Windows doesn't think your video content looks like it's pirated.

Um....whaaatt?

Are you talking about the fact that if a driver's hash doesn't match the "digitally-signed by the publisher" hash it's considered not a valid driver to install? Yes, how evil that is. Hacked drivers won't be usable, the world will end. What will malware makers do without access to kernel-level code? :(

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Jaakko
pray Windows doesn't think your video content looks like it's pirated.

I don't need to. My bittorrented HD videos play fine on Vista, and probably would even if my video card or my HDTV were not HDCP compatible.

[Asher]

Originally posted by LordShiva
The ribbon interface takes some getting used to, and clients who use a previous version of Office will need to download some sort of translator.
To clarify...you can save in Office 97/2000/2003 formats from Office 2007 if you need to. That support exists.

[Solver]

There's a learning curve, but I don't consider it considerable at all.

Well, you're far more proficient than the average user ;).

Sorry, left this too vague. You can now implement UDF in .NET as well.

That's pretty cool... how widespread is the .NET usage there? If I want to write some macros, am I still stuck with Office's version of Visual Basic, or can I use, say, C#?

[Asher]

Originally posted by LordShiva
I don't need to. My bittorrented HD videos play fine on Vista, and probably would even if my video card or my HDTV were not HDCP compatible.
My videocard is not HDCP compatible, and yes, all my bittorrented media plays just fine as well.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Well, you're far more proficient than the average user ;).
It's not just me, it's been in my parent's house and my SO's computer for the beta duration as well.

My dad, being an old conservative guy who has used Office for hours a day since the early 90s grumbled at first 'cause it's different, but he prefers it now as well. Didn't take him long.

That's pretty cool... how widespread is the .NET usage there? If I want to write some macros, am I still stuck with Office's version of Visual Basic, or can I use, say, C#?
It uses .NET intermediate code. That means you can write it in any language you want that can compile down to .NET.

VB, C++, C#, Python, etc.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher

To clarify...you can save in Office 97/2000/2003 formats from Office 2007 if you need to. That support exists.

The OpenDocument format still can't be opened, right?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
The OpenDocument format still can't be opened, right?
Not out of the box. There is a free plugin that reads/writes to ODF.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/odf-converter

That sourceforge project is MS-sponsored as well.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Asher


Um....whaaatt?

Are you talking about the fact that if a driver's hash doesn't match the "digitally-signed by the publisher" hash it's considered not a valid driver to install? Yes, how evil that is. Hacked drivers won't be usable, the world will end. What will malware makers do without access to kernel-level code? :(

So I can't write my own driver for a piece of hardware for which I know the specs?

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher

Not out of the box. There is a free plugin that reads/writes to ODF.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/odf-converter

That sourceforge project is MS-sponsored as well.

So could I, hypothetically, write my own plugins for other file formats, without access to the MS Word code?

[Asher]

Originally posted by aneeshm
So I can't write my own driver for a piece of hardware for which I know the specs?
You can provided it's not going to be operating in kernel mode.

If it's going to be operating in kernel mode you need to get a license from MS for security and stability purposes. Bad drivers were by far the #1 cause of Windows crashes, so drivers go through extensive QA by MS before they are digitally signed for release now.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
So could I, hypothetically, write my own plugins for other file formats, without access to the MS Word code?
Yes. Input/output is provided by plugins.

[Ramo]

WAY improved mathematical equation support (TeX-like)

Automatic bibliographic/citation generation engine (APA, etc. Extensively used last year in school, very useful)

:b:

[Zopperoni]

Originally posted by Asher
<b>Outlook</b>

Email is now indexed for instant-search capabilities (results as you type in each letter of a search)

Most of the other changes are collaboration-related, which i haven't had a chance to play with yet. Work rolls it out soon with Exchange 2007, so we'll see.
Is it true that HTML emails in OL 07 are now rendered using Word instead of IE?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Zopperoni

Is it true that HTML emails in OL 07 are now rendered using Word instead of IE?
I don't use it as an email client at home so I haven't done much testing, but I've heard this is the case. And it makes sense from a security perspective.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by nostromo


Download the Vista upgrade advisor. It'll tell if your computer is up to the task.

There is a difference between up to task and should I upgrade.

JM

[Oerdin]

Vista is getting lots of ho-hum reviews. Granted most of these reviewers aren't technical people and so don't understand the differences underneither the GUI but most of the potential buyers don't either. They're going to go on what these writers say and right now the word is that Vista is ok but not a vital upgrade. I doubt we'll see a big push by the masses to adopt this OS and instead it will be a slow transition.

I also wonder if Vista is going to be like Windows 2000 or one of the other less used MS OSs out there. I don't know what MS's release plans are. Anyone know what other OSs MS is working on or planning?

[Zopperoni]

Originally posted by Asher
I don't use it as an email client at home so I haven't done much testing, but I've heard this is the case. And it makes sense from a security perspective.
I can understand that. I can also see that since Windows Update is now a stand-alone utility, there is no more necessity for IE, which would make it a safer choice to run it off Word.

However, given Word's limited web-processing capability, that does eliminate a lot of the funky stuff you could do.

[Jon Miller]

I ask because I have heard that Vista has improved Tablet functionality... so it interests me.

JM

[Jon Miller]

I always prefered Text emails anyways. Funky emails, like web sites, annoy me.

JM

[Asher]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Vista is getting lots of ho-hum reviews. Granted most of these reviewers aren't technical people and so don't understand the differences underneither the GUI but most of the potential buyers don't either. They're going to go on what these writers say and right now the word is that Vista is ok but not a vital upgrade. I doubt we'll see a big push by the masses to adopt this OS and instead it will be a slow transition.
XP was also predicted to be adopted slowly. Urban Ranger was seen regularly gloating about "poor XP sales" in these parts of town.

I also wonder if Vista is going to be like Windows 2000 or one of the other less used MS OSs out there. I don't know what MS's release plans are. Anyone know what other OSs MS is working on or planning?
MS is not going to do a major overhaul like Vista again. They're going smaller component-based updates, all based on Vista.

[Solver]

I also wonder if Vista is going to be like Windows 2000 or one of the other less used MS OSs out there.

Win2000 isn't a less-used OS, WinME is. Anyway, it looks like MS has done away with their methodology of releasing a new OS every couple of years. In that sense, if the next Windows version isn't coming before the end of 2010, we'll probably see most people on Vista. Generally speaking, people use the OS that comes with their computer, instead of buying an OS upgrade or changing the OS on the PC their bought.

Personally, unless I change my opinion completely, I'll hold off upgrading until maybe the next version. Certainly if MS does, after all, release DX10 for XP.

[Solver]

With this talk about Windows Update being standalone, is IE no longer an integral part of Vista, basically being the OS's shell? Can IE be uninstalled the way any reuglar program can?

[Asher]

IE can be uninstalled in XP too.

The core rendering engine remains as it's part of .NET and the API in the OS. Third party programs rely on it for web rendering, and would cease to function if it's removed.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Zopperoni
However, given Word's limited web-processing capability, that does eliminate a lot of the funky stuff you could do.

That's kind of the point. It's an email, not a frigging web page.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Personally, unless I change my opinion completely, I'll hold off upgrading until maybe the next version. Certainly if MS does, after all, release DX10 for XP.
Will absolutely never happen, for architectural reasons alone.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


That's kind of the point. It's an email, not a frigging web page.

Did you find Vista on your school's MSDN AA page?

According to what I've read some schools haven't added it to their inventory yet, while others have.

[Kuciwalker]

No :frownnod:

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Solver
With this talk about Windows Update being standalone, is IE no longer an integral part of Vista, basically being the OS's shell? Can IE be uninstalled the way any reuglar program can?

I would love that.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher

Will absolutely never happen, for architectural reasons alone.

Hmm, why's that? What does DX10 use that makes it impossible to port to XP?

I've also read about DirectX 9.L, which is, supposedly, basically DX10 for XP, allowing DX10 games to run on XP. Is that not correct?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Hmm, why's that? What does DX10 use that makes it impossible to port to XP?
Fundamentally different driver model, the underpinning of DirectX.

I've also read about DirectX 9.L, which is, supposedly, basically DX10 for XP, allowing DX10 games to run on XP. Is that not correct?
No, it's not. It allows you to use new 4.0 shader models, but does not support other DirectX 10 feature -- most notably its new driver model and far less overhead.

[Solver]

Not sure I'm following. If DX9.L grants shader 4.0, that's a graphical feature. The driver model of DX10 doesn't directly affect what's rendered visually, does it?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Not sure I'm following. If DX9.L grants shader 4.0, that's a graphical feature. The driver model of DX10 doesn't directly affect what's rendered visually, does it?
Yeah it does, especially on modern hardware that needs to deal with massive threading engines (256+ threads in flight), etc.

DirectX 10 is a major architectural shift in the entire rendering pipeline for DirectX, from the ground up (driver to the high-level API). It completely chops off backwards compatibility (note: DirectX 9 coexists with DX10 for older games) and starts from scratch relying on many Vista-specific features, down to the kernel and memory system and the desktop composition engine.

In addition to graphics, DirectX 10 completely lacks DirectSound and DirectInput as well (replaced with XInput and XACT, developed for the Xbox 360)

It also adds the DirectX Scheduler (process scheduler), DirectX Virtual Memory (if graphics RAM is full it automatically falls back to system RAM). It also removes "capability bits", which games used to test if a certain piece of hardware supported specific features. For a card to be DX10, it's all or nothing.

[Solver]

I take this means that projects such as Wine are now screwed big time? They have a fairly good re-implementation of DX8 through OpenGL, with still only the most basic DX9 support. With DX10 being such a change in architecture, that probably becomes a huge problem there.

Why'd they want to replace DirectSound and Input with systems designed for the Xbox, though?

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Asher
The output is saved in Word files or XML, so yeah. Since the XML file format is completely open, it shouldn't take much for a conversion tool if people wanted that.
The XML format's interesting. It's actually a .zip file that has multiple .xml files within that contain information on the actual content, the formatting, and the like.

The ribbon interface takes some getting used to, and clients who use a previous version of Office will need to download some sort of translator.
Actually, if you have a legit copy/volume license copy, you can get the localized language packs. (Incidentally, this is also where the proofing tools have gone. (http://technet2.microsoft.com/Office/en-us/library/5cf51bb9-fc96-46ea-949c-5bbc1fb3c89a1033.mspx?mfr=true))

To clarify...you can save in Office 97/2000/2003 formats from Office 2007 if you need to. That support exists.
There's also a plug-in for Windows versions of Office that enables them to read the new format.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
Actually, if you have a legit copy/volume license copy, you can get the localized language packs. (Incidentally, this is also where the proofing tools have gone. (http://technet2.microsoft.com/Office/en-us/library/5cf51bb9-fc96-46ea-949c-5bbc1fb3c89a1033.mspx?mfr=true))

Oh, I didn't mean that kind of translator, but this one:


There's also a plug-in for Windows versions of Office that enables them to read the new format.

[Solver]

The XML format's interesting. It's actually a .zip file that has multiple .xml files within that contain information on the actual content, the formatting, and the like.

Come on, it does show that MS could easily move to a completely open format in Office 2007. Of course, it'd be a bad business move, open format = easier achieved compatibility by 3rd party products and less pushing of the upgrade cycle.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Come on, it does show that MS could easily move to a completely open format in Office 2007. Of course, it'd be a bad business move, open format = easier achieved compatibility by 3rd party products and less pushing of the upgrade cycle.

Methinks you should do some googling about MS' support of the ODF in Office 2007 and its public schemas for the XML-based file formats.

No existing document formats can handle all of the information and formatting a Word doc needs for all of its features.

[Solver]

So saving a sophisticated Word document in the XML format isn't lossless?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
I take this means that projects such as Wine are now screwed big time? They have a fairly good re-implementation of DX8 through OpenGL, with still only the most basic DX9 support. With DX10 being such a change in architecture, that probably becomes a huge problem there.
Yeah, that's the problem with the Linux approach to emulation-10-years-later.

Win32 support is still awful on Linux and it's over 10 years old. It is now deprecated anyway.

Why'd they want to replace DirectSound and Input with systems designed for the Xbox, though?
Because developers found them easier to work with and more capable.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
So saving a sophisticated Word document in the XML format isn't lossless?
It is, because the schemas it can save in support all of the necessary fields.

[Solver]

Yeah, that's the problem with the Linux approach to emulation-10-years-later.

Win32 support is still awful on Linux and it's over 10 years old. It is now deprecated anyway.

It's a compatibility layer there, no emulation going on. The Win32 support is fine, though far from great. Applications not using graphical features install and run fine in Linux. I run a few myself.

Still, the .NET support in Linux is actually better than Win32 support. Heck, a bunch of .NET apps even runs natively on the cutting-edge Linux releases.

[Asher]

Does that have anything to do with MS assisting with .NET runtimes on *nix? Even contributing a BSD runtime as open source?

[Solver]

Actually, .NET executables run that well through Mono Project, which explicitly doesn't have anything to do with MS. Moreover, they don't even allow people with access to MS source code to contribute.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Actually, .NET executables run that well through Mono Project, which explicitly doesn't have anything to do with MS. Moreover, they don't even allow people with access to MS source code to contribute.
That's for legal reasons. More specifically, it's illegal for people with access to MS source code to contribute to Mono. Much like it was illegal for me to contribute to GCC while I worked at IBM.

Mono got extensive documentation from MS on .NET, and MS agreed to never sue them for patent infringements in their Mono implementation.

[Caligastia]

I think for most people it would be premature to upgrade to Vista right now because there is very little in the way of software that will actually install on it due to the radical change in directory structure. Also, MS is requiring that all software installed on Vista be certified.

I'd stick with XP for a while yet.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Caligastia
I think for most people it would be premature to upgrade to Vista right now because there is very little in the way of software that will actually install on it due to the radical change in directory structure. Also, MS is requiring that all software installed on Vista be certified.

Huh???????????????????

The vast majority of things work as usual, and no, it doesn't need to be certified by MS to be installed...

And I have no idea what you're talking about with the directory structure. Must be a negro thing. :)

[Caligastia]

Not many software manufacturers have made software for Vista yet, and you won't be able to install all your old games on it because the directory structure is different.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Not many software manufacturers have made software for Vista yet, and you won't be able to install all your old games on it because the directory structure is different.

Wha???

Somebody should have told me. I successfully installed a lot of games last night that work fine. :mad:

If I had known they wouldn't work, I'd not have done it! :mad:

[Caligastia]

Try installing Civ 4 on it. Good luck.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Caligastia
I think for most people it would be premature to upgrade to Vista right now
Correct, I'd say. While it does have quite a few nice changes, they're largely under the hood, and XP is "good enough" that most won't change without a suitably compelling reason... and MS has thus far failed to capture the public view on this.

because there is very little in the way of software that will actually install on it due to the radical change in directory structure.
Wrong.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Try installing Civ 4 on it. Good luck.

I did. Thanks for the wishes, but I didn't need any luck.

[aneeshm]

I just installed office 2007. The ribbon interface is..... interesting. How much time does it take to get used to?

[Asher]

Is Caligastia confusing Windows Vista with DOS 2.0?

[Asher]

Originally posted by aneeshm
I just installed office 2007. The ribbon interface is..... interesting. How much time does it take to get used to?
Around 131.2 minutes.

[Jon Miller]

I play EVE and Civ4 on my laptop (and WoW, but not for the last month).

I also use OneNote 2003, Cygwin (for LaTeX and ssh) and surf.

Just to list specs:
100 GB Harddrive.
1.83 Core Duo Proc. (T2400)
1 GB Ram
950 (??) GMA dislpay driver

I can upgrade the RAM, I think (probaly would upgrade it to 2 GB). Should I upgrade?

I know that EVE is planning to be DirectX 10 in a coming client release.

Jon Miller

[Asher]

Cygwin works fine in Vista? That's next on my list...I need my SSH server back.

[Jon Miller]

That is what I wan tto know! Please keep me informed.

JM

[LordShiva]

http://www.iexbeta.com/wiki/index.php/Windows_Vista_Software_Compatibility_List

WTF is EVE?

[Jon Miller]

http://www.eve-online.com/faq/faq_01.asp

JM

[Solver]

This is bizzare. Installed Office 2007 - feeling quite lost because of the new interface, which is understandable, having worked with it for 1 minute. Still, the last time I was lost with Office was when I first used it :D. That said, I can feel that the new interface is much superior. Insertion of citations and such stuff is great, the next time I write something more sophisticated than plaintext, I'm probably going to regret being on OpenOffice...

[Solver]

Second impression: I can see that (this is Word) the interface makes some features that many users I know don't know how to access very visible (such as inserting a blank page). Automatic word count in status bar :b:. Translation tooltips :b: :b:

[snoopy369]

Yeah, I love office 2007. Will be sad when my beta expires in a few months, though by then I think that my GF will be able to get a copy through school (MS Campus Agreement, not MSDN). Not sure about vista, will wait to install that (among other reasons, I can't get one through CA as my GF only gets one copy that way, compared to 3 of office). But if DX10 is vista-only, and if it's important to a game I play, then perhaps I'll give in to MS's blackmail and buy it :)

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Second impression: I can see that (this is Word) the interface makes some features that many users I know don't know how to access very visible (such as inserting a blank page). Automatic word count in status bar :b:. Translation tooltips :b: :b:

The discoverability was their main concern, and a very valid one. Word has ballooned in features but the mess of menus buried most of them so they weren't obvious.

Now the idea is context-sensitive tabs. Not only are the buttons in that tab related to what you want to do, you'll see things you never bothered to look before -- something that was buried in three menus before becomes obvious.

Also note you can customize your own toolbar for frequently used things (eg, superscript and subscript) in the top left by the Office orb.

BTW, there's some nice symmetry in Office 2007 and Vista -- Office Orb in the top left, Windows Orb in the bottom left.

[Solver]

Upgrading your entire OS just for a game is wrong. If I ever upgrade to Vista it will be because I'll fall in love with it after trying it on another PC, but that seems highly unlikely so far. Plus I still hate its memory usage.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Upgrading your entire OS just for a game is wrong. If I ever upgrade to Vista it will be because I'll fall in love with it after trying it on another PC, but that seems highly unlikely so far. Plus I still hate its memory usage.
I really do not understand this complaint anymore.

Memory is dirt cheap these days. For $77 you can get 1GB.

If the design of the product is faster and more reliable, why is this such a big deal? Vista's memory usage is nothing for the types of PC it should be installed on. If you have less than 1GB of RAM, then I'm guessing the rest of your computer isn't up to snuff either.

[Solver]

My PC is, in fact, Vista Premium Ready, or whatever they call it. I guess that "dirt cheap" also varies from country to country but that's not the essence of my complaint.

I bought myself a good amount of memory because I want plenty of it left for applications I use. Not the OS itself but other apps. I felt quite comfortable using XP when I had 512 MB RAM, too.

But the good thing for me is that I currently have the vast majority of my RAM available for games and apps, which is a big plus because I like to have some things in the background most of the time. Say, if I'm working in Visual Studio, I'll have it running the entire day, even if having a session of Civ4.

If I install Vista, it'd be as if I hadn't upgraded, because once again a sizeable part of my RAM (a third maybe, I haven't tested its usage myself) will be occupied by the OS itself.

EDIT: Well, running XP, its processes currently take up about 90 MB RAM. That means the services, the shell and various stuff spawned by the OS itself.

[LordShiva]

I need to figure out how to uninstall Media Centre.

[Jon Miller]

Get Business, it is what I plan to do.

JM
(currently, still waiting for people to address my concerns.. and yes, I ran that program and it said I was Vista ready)

[Asher]

Which concerns?

I'd have 2GB of RAM, min, for vista. Just 'cause it's stupid not to.

[asleepathewheel]

Hmm.

For some reason, my wife's university, Indiana, will get the dvds of Ultimate sometime in April :( I can, however, download office 2007 tonight :)

This is good for us, since we'll be moving to another university in August, and I'm not sure they will have the same deals, another R1, though not as connected as IU (presumably, I have no idea)

[Solver]

I'd have 2GB of RAM, min, for vista. Just 'cause it's stupid not to.

I'm still not that excited at the thought of having to have 2GB for Vista, where having 1GB of RAM under XP made the OS itself only occupy 10% RAM or so.

Yes, I suck :p.

[Asher]

You don't have to have 2GB for Vista. You have to have 512MB.

I just think it's stupid to run a new computer with less than 2GB.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm getting a RAM upgrade. I have 1 GB, I think I'll go to 3 GB.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Asher
You don't have to have 2GB for Vista. You have to have 512MB.

I just think it's stupid to run a new computer with less than 2GB.

Does this same sentiment apply to laptops?

[Asher]

Yes. The SO's new laptop has 2 gigs, as does my brother's new one.

[Oerdin]

Most new machines now come with 2 GB of RAM. This is partially because memory is so cheap but it is also in preperation for the large demands Vista is going to make on machines.

I've read several more articles and the consensus seems to be that 5%-10% of computer users will upgrade while the rest will eventually switch when they buy a new computer but will stick with XP until that point.

[Solver]

Asher, tell me please exactly how useable Vista becomes with 512 MB RAM. I've had experience with 32 MB RAM PCs running Win2000, I'm afraid Vista on 512 wouldn't be much better.

I've also read articles saying that around 5% of computers are Vista Premium Ready. Not surprising, particularly given how widespread those atrocious integrated video cards are.

And what do you guys do with your memory, I can barely manage to make 1 GB of RAM full, and that's when running a game...

[Asher]

I haven't tried Vista with 512MB. I don't consider memory an issue. If you're installing Vista you should have a newer computer with enough HD.

[Oerdin]

I imagine games are what uses most of that memory. Some new games are real memory hogs.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I imagine games are what uses most of that memory. Some new games are real memory hogs.

Yeah, games. They can take up like 700-750 MB of memory. That, along with some OS and background stuff, still barely fills 1 GB.

[Kuciwalker]

Until you realize that windows is a multitasking OS and you end up running FF + other stuff in the background ;)

[Solver]

Running lots of other stuff in the background when playing a game is a waste, though. Simply not prudent ;).

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Yeah, games. They can take up like 700-750 MB of memory. That, along with some OS and background stuff, still barely fills 1 GB.
You obviously haven't played games like Vanguard. I got OOM errors with 2GB.

[Oerdin]

I would guess that game is poorly optimized for memory usage then if it is having problems running on a machine with 2 GB of memory and a decent video card.

[Asher]

I would agree with you.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher

You obviously haven't played games like Vanguard. I got OOM errors with 2GB.

I think FEAR and Oblivion are the most demanding games I've played. But if you do get OOM errors with 2GB, that sounds like a spectacularly poor engine and memory code.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Just purchased me 2 GBs of PC3200 DDR SDRAM from Mushkin, pushing me to 3 GB. Vista should run more than pretty damn nicely on that. :b:

[Asher]

You remembered to pair the DIMMs correctly, right? :)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Asher
You remembered to pair the DIMMs correctly, right? :)

Yep... well, I let them (the website) do it ;). I got a 2x1GB kit. They are (or damn well should be ;)) identical:

http://www.mushkin.com/doc/products/memory_detail.asp?id=193

Now, for the bigger decision. I know everyone says you should do a clean install... but it's just such a pain in the ass to backup everything, I'm wondering if Upgrade install isn't such a bad idea. After all, I'll have the disk so just in case I have to go clean install later I can.

[Solver]

It's not that much of a pain to backup if you have the hard drive space. Move all data to a second partition, clean install while wiping the first patition, then move the data back if needed.

[FrostyBoy]

How much does Vista and Office go for (US$)?

Is upgrade cheaper? If so, how much is upgrade?

[Jon Miller]

can you do a fresh install from the upgrade?

I like to have all the same type of Dimm, and paired. So I would want 4 GB or 1 GB or 2 GB.

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
can you do a fresh install from the upgrade?

Yes. You can do either upgrade or a fresh install from the Upgrade copy, but of course you need a valid Windows XP for that.

[snoopy369]

I don't think having a set of two pairs would help you any. So having 2x512 and 2x1024 would be fine from a performance point of view, as long as they all ran the same speeds and voltages and such.

[FrostyBoy]

Imran, according to the official site, it depends on the OS you have installed. If you have XP Pro installed, you cannot do an upgrade, you must do a clean install.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Now, for the bigger decision. I know everyone says you should do a clean install... but it's just such a pain in the ass to backup everything, I'm wondering if Upgrade install isn't such a bad idea. After all, I'll have the disk so just in case I have to go clean install later I can.

Unless you're as OCD as I am (or as Aeson is) about keeping your system spotless, you should probably do a clean install.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Sn00py
Imran, according to the official site, it depends on the OS you have installed. If you have XP Pro installed, you cannot do an upgrade, you must do a clean install.

Actually you can do an upgrade, though only to Vista Business or Ultimate. I'm lucky I have XP Home, because I'm getting the Home Premium Upgrade.

Though yes, I believe some Windows OSs (XP Professional x64, Windows 2000 and prior) will not allow you to upgrade, but rather do a clean install.

HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that those who have Windows 2000 or later versions have to buy a 'full' version. They can get 'upgrade' versions of the software as well, they just have to clean install it from that version.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Unless you're as OCD as I am (or as Aeson is) about keeping your system spotless, you should probably do a clean install.

Yeah, I was actually hunting around my files and it seems I really don't have to save much. Though a lot of reinstalling of programs will have to occur :D.

[Oerdin]

I've never really understood OCD. I know it is due to a chemical imbalance in the brain but, having had a severe OCD person in the same major as me in college (and thus in many of my classes), it seemed like much of the complusive behavior could be control abet at great effort.

[Proteus_MST]

My boss just presented Vista and Office 2007 2 days ago, as we have a single computer running on Vista in the office (to test how the applications we program run with Vista and Office 2007) and we laughed heartily about it :D
Vista has lots of graphical additions noone really needs and the interesting thing about Office 2007 seems to be that almost none of the things you need are at their right places anymore :D
The sad thing is, that I will have to get used to Office 2007, as sometime in this year I´ll have to take care of the Access Database I´m programming right now and make sure it works with Office 2007 as well as with Office 2003

[Tim_Augustus]

Originally posted by Sn00py
Imran, according to the official site, it depends on the OS you have installed. If you have XP Pro installed, you cannot do an upgrade, you must do a clean install.

That only applies to the x64 version of windows xp professional, or if you're upgrading from xp pro 32bit to vista home basic or home premium :p

Media Centre can only upgrade to Home Premium or Ultimate and XP Tablet Edition is the same as XP Pro 32bit

Should be noted however that all legit versions of xp are Vista Upgrade version eligible, as is Windows 2000 Pro.

<a href=http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/upgradeinfo.mspx>Microsoft's Windows Vista upgrade info page</a>

[Jon Miller]

Hmm, I own copies of 2000 Pro, XP Pro, and XP Tablet. So that means I can purchase 3 copies of Vista?

JM
(of course, there is no reason to purchase it for the old machine)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Tim_Augustus
That only applies to the x64 version of windows xp professional, or if you're upgrading from xp pro 32bit to vista home basic or home premium :p

Media Centre can only upgrade to Home Premium or Ultimate and XP Tablet Edition is the same as XP Pro 32bit

Should be noted however that all legit versions of xp are Vista Upgrade version eligible, as is Windows 2000 Pro.

<a href=http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/upgradeinfo.mspx>Microsoft's Windows Vista upgrade info page</a>

But it seems, apparently, that a lot of folks are planning to do the clean install regardless of whether than they can in place upgrade or not. So I guess that doesn't matter all that much for the early adopters.

[Tim_Augustus]

Upgrade versions, yes ;)

(I assume OEM versions including those where you don't get a proper windows install disc wouldn't be problematic, no? Don't know personally as I don't buy such rubbish ;) )

[Jon Miller]

To my knowledge there is no such thing as a Windows XP Tablet edition install disk. As of last spring at least, everyone said that if you wanted to do a clean install you had to copy somethings onto a disk, and then use a regular XP install disk.

JM

[Tim_Augustus]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


But it seems, apparently, that a lot of folks are planning to do the clean install regardless of whether than they can in place upgrade or not. So I guess that doesn't matter all that much for the early adopters.

That's true, although from what I've heard (and as you would expect) Vista's in-place upgrade capabilities are significantly better than XP

Personally I think most of the people that will buy upgrade versions will be seasoned windows users for whom clean installations are second nature ;)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Tim_Augustus That's true, although from what I've heard (and as you would expect) Vista's in-place upgrade capabilities are significantly better than XP

Which is why I'm seriously considering going that route and if anything goes really wrong to do a clean install at that point.

[Verto]

Clean installs :b: Nice to do some spring cleaning.

[Provost Harrison]

I would give it a go, but alas I will lose use of my modem as there do not appear to be any drivers available.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What modem do you have, PH? There are companies that have beta Vista drivers that Microsoft has support for.

[Provost Harrison]

It is based around the Conexant AccessRunner DSL - it is an internal PCI modem, and I have checked and no drivers seem to be available...apart from that there would be no problem.

[Solver]

Well... http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/13487;_ylt=AifrqrOsKBzyooUZRYBrx2MFLZA5

In most cases, Vista is slower than XP, but not terribly. Photoshop tests showed a drop in performance of 7 or 8 percent on dual-core PCs and 13 to 23 percent on single-core machines.

Fairly disappointing.

In multitasking tests (where the tester ran multiple tasks simultaneously), results were mixed: Single-core machines were marginally slower with Vista (6 to 10 percent), while dual-core machines were significantly faster with Vista (up to 31 percent).

:b: to multithreaded coding and performance

Memory is critical, with 2GB being the sweet spot for Vista.

Ridiculous. Most hardcore gamers even have less than that.

[Kuciwalker]

Ridiculous. Most hardcore gamers even have less than that.

If so, barely. I'd bet the proportion is close to half.

[Solver]

I mostly see 1.5 GB on hardcore gaming forums. Still, it's too much - if the "sweet spot" for an OS is in the league of what hardcore gamers have, that's sort of a problem.

[Kuciwalker]

We're talking about power users here, multitasking.

[Solver]

Non-powerusers multitask, too. They run torrents in the background, or have browser + word processor open, etc. Of course, it's not really on the same level that real powerusers multitask, but still...

[Asher]

2GB has been the standard for powergamers for about a year now.

DUDE. RAM IS CHEAP. GET OVER IT. If you want to live in the past, stick with old OSes.

Thanks. :)

[Solver]

It's not just about the cost, duh. Back in the day, software that used memory efficiently was considered good. Now no one seems to value software that has low system requirements.

But, Asher, if you buy me two 2GB sticks, I will agree to install Vista and try working with it, doing my best to keep objective :).

[Kuciwalker]

Software that used memory efficient was good because memory was expensive and thus scarce. If I have 2GB it doesn't matter if I'm using 500 MB or 1500.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
It's not just about the cost, duh. Back in the day, software that used memory efficiently was considered good. Now no one seems to value software that has low system requirements.
Welcome to 2007, where we have more than 256KB of RAM and thus don't waste our lives squeezing out a bit or two of more memory with lots of work.

[Solver]

Kuci, I'll write a version of Notepad for you that uses 500 MB upon startup, you'll be happy with that :p.

Attitudes of it doesn't matter how much is used if you have enough are basically the inability to value what you have.

[Kuciwalker]

Kuci, I'll write a version of Notepad for you that uses 500 MB upon startup, you'll be happy with that.

I'd be rather pissed because notepad[++] is a quick app that I would open an close fairly often and wouldn't want to read 500 MB from the hard drive each time.

Plus, that would actually mean I'd need a paging file sometimes.


Attitudes of it doesn't matter how much is used if you have enough are basically the inability to value what you have.

I value paying less for more powerful software and having it work better because developers don't have to spend as much time performing memory optimization as other things.

[Solver]

wouldn't want to read 500 MB from the hard drive each time

It's very easy to create an app that will take up 500 MB of RAM without reading that amount from the hard drive :).

I value paying less for more powerful software and having it work better because developers don't have to spend as much time performing memory optimization as other things.

That's saying nothing. What is "more powerful"? What does "working better" entail? Are you talking about an overall performance boost, or some added user-level functionality, or better hardware support, or what exactly?

What ticks me off is that Aero is a major advertising point for Vista and, as always, many users who upgrade (I do not mean you here) haven't got any idea about what the new functionality tha they're upgrading for is in the first place.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Kuci, I'll write a version of Notepad for you that uses 500 MB upon startup, you'll be happy with that :p.

http://www.openoffice.org

What ticks me off is that Aero is a major advertising point for Vista and, as always, many users who upgrade (I do not mean you here) haven't got any idea about what the new functionality tha they're upgrading for is in the first place.
It's interesting you bring up a feature that reduces system RAM usage in this discussion.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Is it any surprise that newer OSs require steeper requirements? I remember when Windows 95 came out and people were *****ing about the min requirements. It happens all the time. It is silly to argue about the RAM usage of Vista, IMO.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Is it any surprise that newer OSs require steeper requirements? I remember when Windows 95 came out and people were *****ing about the min requirements. It happens all the time. It is silly to argue about the RAM usage of Vista, IMO.
It was the same for XP. A lot of people were diehard Win2K fans because XP used more RAM...

Now XP is the golden standard. Funny how that works. ;)

[Kuciwalker]

That's saying nothing. What is "more powerful"? What does "working better" entail? Are you talking about an overall performance boost, or some added user-level functionality, or better hardware support, or what exactly?

All of them at once.

It's less expensive to pay for more memory than to pay for more memory efficiency.

[Solver]

Well, you have to admit that the 2K-XP rise in requirements was nothing compared to the XP-Vista rise in requirements. Of course, there was also a much larger break in time between XP and Vista, so not expecting greater requirements would be silly. BTW, I skipped 2K at home, so you can't blame me on that ;).

While I presume the situation in North America is different, I don't think even 5% computers over here would qualify as Vista Premium Ready. Not to mention that businesses use old computers :(.

Seriously, I'm also surprised at the discrepancy between Vista's RAM and CPU requirements. RAM is 512 MB for Vista Capable and 1 GB for Premium Ready. These are considerable amounts - I do not see business machines running with more than 512 MB, if that, and 1GB is also considered a good amount of memory. CPU, on the other hand, is 1 GHz for Premium Ready, and a 1 GHz CPU is considered way weak by now. I've certainly never seen a 1 GHz computer with 1GB of RAM.

It also sucks how much HDD space gets used, but that is also a criticism against XP. I mean, XP used to need about 1GB for installation, now, with all those damn service packs and updates, it takes more. My XP folder seems to take 2.2 GB now.

I actually wish MS had done better with Vista. I fell in love with XP when I used it, definitely the best Windows, it was stable and usable. Well, of course those security problems transpired later, but still. Funny thing is, I tried to use Linux even back then, but it was simply much inferior to XP in usability. I couldn't even get all of my hardware working properly, trying different distros, not to mention dozens of other usability issues. It's improved heckuva lot in the recent years, and it looks to me like Vista isn't setting a new standard. At the moment, Linux does just about everything on the user-end, not to mention very modest resource usage.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, Solver, I work for the US government. They provide me with a laptop because we go on site for work a lot. My government laptop has 1 GB of RAM. I'm sure most businesses have that or more. And no one says that you need to run all the graphics intense stuff (like Aero) at a workplace. The admin can just set it to the basic setup (or even the ugly classical).

[Solver]

As said - the situation in North America is highly different. I'd be surprised if it were not. The cost of a laptop with 1GB of RAM exceeds the average monthly wage here like 2.5 times. I've seen my fair share of business PCs, and they're usually lacking. PCs in government institutions are horrible - they get a large-scale upgrade something like once per six-seven years, most governmental PCs can barely run XP adequately.

*sigh*

[Asher]

I don't think Linux's resource usage is "moderate" at all. On my laptop Ubuntu takes up considerably more RAM than XP does.

For future reference, guys, Aero is a feature that reduces system RAM use (and CPU use). It offloads the GUI from CPU + system RAM to GPU + GPU RAM.

You also need to stop quoting the 512MB/1GB numbers as how much Vista uses. It doesn't use nearly that much. Those numbers are realistic numbers for how much RAM you should have to run Vista + applications with good performance. New applications that run on Vista are anticipated to use more RAM, so this makes sense.

Lastly, I absolutely do not understand this obsession with RAM requirements. Again, RAM is one of the cheapest components of the system and for computers Vista will be installed on, asking for 1GB is not too much at all. Remember, that's not saying Vista uses 1GB of RAM...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
As said - the situation in North America is highly different. I'd be surprised if it were not. The cost of a laptop with 1GB of RAM exceeds the average monthly wage here like 2.5 times. I've seen my fair share of business PCs, and they're usually lacking. PCs in government institutions are horrible - they get a large-scale upgrade something like once per six-seven years, most governmental PCs can barely run XP adequately.

*sigh*

No offense, but perhaps Vista isn't a product with the third world in mind? :)

[Solver]

I don't think Linux's resource usage is "moderate" at all. On my laptop Ubuntu takes up considerably more RAM than XP does.

Well, it keeps a large memory cache, but the actual processes do not take up that memory. Right now, on my PC: Xorg consumes 51 MB, Perl 15, Gnome-Panel 10 and Nautilus 7. Not great, but not bad. It becomes good, though, when you also consider hard drive space - Ubuntu still fits on one CD, which also includes lots of useful software unlike the default Windows (any version) installation.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Well, it keeps a large memory cache, but the actual processes do not take up that memory. Right now, on my PC: Xorg consumes 51 MB, Perl 15, Gnome-Panel 10 and Nautilus 7. Not great, but not bad. It becomes good, though, when you also consider hard drive space - Ubuntu still fits on one CD, which also includes lots of useful software unlike the default Windows (any version) installation.

Depends what you consider to be useful. ;)

Myself, 99% of the crap that comes with distros is useless to me...

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher


No offense, but perhaps Vista isn't a product with the third world in mind? :)

I'm in the second world, not the third world :p. Anyway, what's wrong with maximizing one's potential user base? It's going to take forever for Vista to be adopted here. While I recognize that North American market is the most important, they probably could do better. Come on, I just don't believe that Vista is really the best MS can do for five years of development. I am, despite running Linux and all, not anti-MS (nor strictly pro-opensource). So I'm a bit surprised.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher


Depends what you consider to be useful. ;)

Myself, 99% of the crap that comes with distros is useless to me...

There's also a fair bunch of software that I want to add and to remove after a fresh Ubuntu install, but at least it contains enough to work with. OpenOffice, for all of its problems, is better than no office suite. Distros also typically include some C++ IDE and something for web authoring. You have to admit it is better than Windows - on a default Windows system, you don't have a compiler, Notepad is your best code/webpage editor, etc.

BTW, how's the Vista Notepad? I hope they improved it?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
I'm in the second world, not the third world :p. Anyway, what's wrong with maximizing one's potential user base? It's going to take forever for Vista to be adopted here. While I recognize that North American market is the most important, they probably could do better. Come on, I just don't believe that Vista is really the best MS can do for five years of development. I am, despite running Linux and all, not anti-MS (nor strictly pro-opensource). So I'm a bit surprised.

I'm a bit confused because I'm not sure you understand the amount of change that's in Vista compared to XP. The fact that all of this stuff isn't visible to the casual end user is not the point. What would you like to see MS add to Vista that's not there right now?

I'm also a bit confused why you think MS should take out features to reduce memory usage so it can sell better in Latvia, where XP can still be used...

I'm also a bit confused why you think MS worked on Vista for 5 years. I thought it was very public what happened, with the first year's worth of work abandoned and 1.5 years then spent on beefing up XP's security...then starting from scratch on Vista based on Windows 2003.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
There's also a fair bunch of software that I want to add and to remove after a fresh Ubuntu install, but at least it contains enough to work with. OpenOffice, for all of its problems, is better than no office suite. Distros also typically include some C++ IDE and something for web authoring. You have to admit it is better than Windows - on a default Windows system, you don't have a compiler, Notepad is your best code/webpage editor, etc.
But I do not agree. When I install an Operating System, I don't want crap software like OpenOffice. I'd rather get a real software suite than that...

BTW, how's the Vista Notepad? I hope they improved it?
No clue. I use UltraEdit, the best editor around.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher


I'm a bit confused because I'm not sure you understand the amount of change that's in Vista compared to XP. The fact that all of this stuff isn't visible to the casual end user is not the point. What would you like to see MS add to Vista that's not there right now?

I'm also a bit confused why you think MS should take out features to reduce memory usage so it can sell better in Latvia, where XP can still be used...

I'm also a bit confused why you think MS worked on Vista for 5 years. I thought it was very public what happened, with the first year's worth of work abandoned and 1.5 years then spent on beefing up XP's security...then starting from scratch on Vista based on Windows 2003.

I think I understand the changes fairly well. The under the hood changes are great, yes. I know about the driver model and the reworked user privileges and stuff like BitLocker or NSF support. But it's indeed not visible to the users.

What would I like added? Well, Monad/PowerShell for one. Combining, basically, the power of the UNIX command-line tools with the ease-of-use of .NET - it's a great thing. Could easily be the best feature of a new OS. Next, a different filesystem - Vista still uses NTFS. One of the biggest problems of Windows is fragmentation - a Windows system becomes horribly slow months after installation. Why not adopt a non-fragmentable system?

Correct me if this is already in, but, better default apps. The XP Notepad still can't really open large files, plus it's single document. A better default Notepad, with MDI and, let's say, syntax highlighting would do well. Make Paint slightly better, with at least proper image scaling.

And as for the memory usage - I'd like to know what, exactly, is using 500 MB memory when the OS boots, as I read on some sites. What does it load into memory, what the heck is going on there?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
What would I like added? Well, Monad/PowerShell for one. Combining, basically, the power of the UNIX command-line tools with the ease-of-use of .NET - it's a great thing. Could easily be the best feature of a new OS.
This is currently available as a free download, but is not "polished" enough for inclusion. It is currently scheduled to be included for free in Vista SP1 later this year.

Next, a different filesystem - Vista still uses NTFS. One of the biggest problems of Windows is fragmentation - a Windows system becomes horribly slow months after installation. Why not adopt a non-fragmentable system?
There is no such thing.

And Vista's NTFS had substantial improvements, it's "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_ntfs">Transactional NTFS</a> with support for atomic transactions.

Correct me if this is already in, but, better default apps. The XP Notepad still can't really open large files, plus it's single document. A better default Notepad, with MDI and, let's say, syntax highlighting would do well. Make Paint slightly better, with at least proper image scaling.
Paint got a significant upgrade in Vista, not sure about Notepad. I've never had a problem opening docs in Notepad in XP -- the only restriction is RAM?

Plus you are not considering antitrust complaints. MS is certainly cable of a "better notepad" like UltraEdit, but then they'd put a lot of people out of business and get in a lot of trouble.

And as for the memory usage - I'd like to know what, exactly, is using 500 MB memory when the OS boots, as I read on some sites. What does it load into memory, what the heck is going on there?
What sites report that??

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I'm sure most businesses have that or more.
HA! I only have 256MB of RAM at work. We were supposed to get more like a year ago. Still waiting. :tongue:

I'm wondering if we're upgrading to XP (from 2K) this year. Has MS stopped supporting 2K yet?

Historical note: when XP came out, we upgraded to 2K.

[Asher]

This is from a beta version in March, and it's improved since then:
http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html

To illustrate that this is not an aberration, <b><a href="/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-3.jpg" target="_blank">this screenshot</a></b> shows the same system running multiple apps across an enormous 3.2 million pixel desktop with full desktop composition enabled (Aero Glass). The apps in use include Windows Media Player (playing a 640x480 MPEG-2 recording of CSI transferred from a Tivo), multiple instances of IE 7 with multiple tabs open, GAIM with session to IRC and MSN IM, Vista Sidebar, Tivo Desktop in the process of transferring video and the afore mentioned background instance of IIS 7 and MS Virtual Server. Total commit charge is 1.04 GB (1/4 of the total possible) with only about 400MB of actual physical memory in use. Clearly, Vista’s memory utilization in this build is quite a bit more efficient than what is implied in the 800MB commit screenshot and article.

Which brings us to the final piece of this puzzle: Windows tailors its memory footprint depending on the resources available. The virtual memory manager, integral system processes and system services are, using a multitude of mechanisms, intelligent enough to curtail memory utilization, both in commit and actual working set (memory resident in physical RAM) depending on the abilities and circumstances of the machine. Witness the next screenshot of the Task Manager running on a 512MB Vista machine, with desktop composition enabled, idling at about 237MB commit charge with little over half the physical memory in use.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-4.jpg


This by the way is strikingly similar to my low-end XP notebook idling, as depicted in this screenshot.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-5.jpg

[Solver]

This is currently available as a free download, but is not "polished" enough for inclusion. It is currently scheduled to be included for free in Vista SP1 later this year.

If they include it indeed, that'll be one criticism less.

There is no such thing.

Linux boxes on Ext2/Ext3 run just fine without defragmentation tools, because fragmentation on those systems is absolutely negligible. Fragmentation on those may be in the 1-2% range.

Paint got a significant upgrade in Vista, not sure about Notepad. I've never had a problem opening docs in Notepad in XP -- the only restriction is RAM?

I have enough RAM, but you try opening a file of, say, 800 KB in Notepad. Do it with EditPlus or any decent editor (even Windows's WordPad) and it will open damn near instantly. In Notepad it will not, and will not work as well.

And antitrust companies suck :q:.

What sites report that??

I read that on some forums and tech-blogs. Granted, there's one thing I like about memory usage - it seems that Vista uses RAM as a cache much better than XP does, in fact being closer to Linux in that approach.

Now, I need a second computer so I can run benchmarks. My offer for you to send me some RAM still stands :).

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Linux boxes on Ext2/Ext3 run just fine without defragmentation tools, because fragmentation on those systems is absolutely negligible. Fragmentation on those may be in the 1-2% range.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

All systems fragment. That should be clear philosophically. A variety of settings can inhibit this by choosing smaller cluster sizes (as ext2/ext3 do by default), but there are performance tradeoffs for such settings as well. If you're paranoid about defragmentation (and you choose to disable the idle-defragmentation in Vista), then set the cluster size to be much smaller...

[Solver]

Asher, would you do me a favour - post a screenshot of taskman's Processes tab with a clean Vista (no major apps running)?

[Solver]

Well, my fragmentation on the Linux drive is, presently, 0.7%. Fragmentation on Windows is no longer a problem either, which is because of an excellent piece of software called Diskeeper.

[Asher]

I'm at work right now.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Well, my fragmentation on the Linux drive is, presently, 0.7%. Fragmentation on Windows is no longer a problem either, which is because of an excellent piece of software called Diskeeper.
You realize that the authors of Diskeeper are the authors of the auto-defragmenter in Vista? ;)

All file systems fragment over time...the difference is Windows has tools to combat this, and Linux & OS X have no such reliable tools. Their filesystems are thusly designed to have poorer overall throughput in an effort to reduce fragmentation.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher

You realize that the authors of Diskeeper are the authors of the auto-defragmenter in Vista? ;)

Says who :)?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
Says who :)?
The Help -> About screen.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Asher
You realize that the authors of Diskeeper are the authors of the auto-defragmenter in Vista? ;)

Still, Diskeeper pwns Windows Defragmenter about as absolutely as one piece of software can pwn another.

[Asher]

PerfectDisk is my favorite defragmenter.

[Provost Harrison]

The specs aren't that big an issue, this computer is nearly 4 years old but has a gig of RAM in it. My main problem is what benefit am I going to get for the increased overhead? I'm not being a troll here, I really don't know a lot about Vista so would be interested to hear...

[Asher]

If you aren't sure, then don't get it. Wait til your next computer.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9001435

[Asher]

PCWorld's top 15 reasons to switch to Vista: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128656-page,1/article.html

[Provost Harrison]

Thanks.

[Solver]

PCWorld's reasons are bothering me. Two first reasons being basically interface? Please. There are things much more deserving of the first place. Better multi-core usage, memory caching, fast search, that thing that preloads commonly used apps into memory, any of these would be better in the #1 spot.

[Solver]

I guess that, come February, I'll be buying / reading every PC magazine I can get my hands on, I want those reviews and I want those benchmarks...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
PCWorld's reasons are bothering me. Two first reasons being basically interface? Please. There are things much more deserving of the first place. Better multi-core usage, memory caching, fast search, that thing that preloads commonly used apps into memory, any of these would be better in the #1 spot.
That's arguable. The interface is extremely important, and there's a lot of subtle additions to Vista that makes it easier to use.

[Solver]

The interface is extremely important, probably deserving of the #2 or #3 spot if it indeed is good. Shouldn't occupy the #1 spot, though. Plus, even their wording is off - they mention "transparent animated windows that swoosh into place, subtle and elegant colors" first. Makes it sound as if that's the best thing about Vista, though it's almost surely not.

Another worthy contender for the #1 spot would be better security - if true. I mean, we've heard that security is going to be great ever since Win2K - the amount of attacks on Vista and the various worms next month will show.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Solver
The interface is extremely important, probably deserving of the #2 or #3 spot if it indeed is good. Shouldn't occupy the #1 spot, though. Plus, even their wording is off - they mention "transparent animated windows that swoosh into place, subtle and elegant colors" first. Makes it sound as if that's the best thing about Vista, though it's almost surely not.

Another worthy contender for the #1 spot would be better security - if true. I mean, we've heard that security is going to be great ever since Win2K - the amount of attacks on Vista and the various worms next month will show.

Uh.... they weren't supposed to be 'ordered'. It was just his Top 15. If I write my Top 15 movies, I may not put them in order. Doesn't mean the first one I think of is my absolute favorite.

Oh, and interface is very important and belongs on a Top 15 list.

[Asher]

The window-flip feature.

[Asher]

So with Google Talk the only program running, 32% of my 2GB of memory used, which is 624MB.

BUT...

The vast majority of that is for cache. That's pretty obvious by looking at the process list of what's running (all users).

So the "500-600MB" quotes from people just don't know what they're talking about.

[Asher]

The new alt-tab.

[Asher]

Live thumbnails. These update in realtime, just like the alt-tab and window flips, including stuff like video.

[Asher]

The new My Computer.

[Asher]

The "breadcrumb" address navigation feature in Explorer...

[Asher]

You can also easily type in a path.

[Asher]

The folder icons show the contents of the folder -- from pictures to Word docs to PDFs.

[Asher]

The start menu makes it very easy to find apps/files instantly:

[Asher]

Originally posted by Asher
The folder icons show the contents of the folder -- from pictures to Word docs to PDFs.

[Verto]

/me runs away after seeing Asher's photo directory.

[LordShiva]

Yup, I love that feature, and the fact that they can be resized smoothly and on the fly.

[Krill]

OMFG. Vista looks like **** IMO. What version is that Asher?

[Asher]

Also, benchmarks of XP vs Vista:

http://techgage.com/article/windows_vista_system_performance_reports

They're virtually identical, except Vista's slightly faster in disk speed.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Krill
OMFG. Vista looks like **** IMO. What version is that Asher?
Ultimate edition final.

[Asher]

Krill will be happy to know you can change the color/opacity to your choosing.

[Asher]

Retro looks also.

[Kuciwalker]

Can you do a 3.1 theme? :cute:

[Imran Siddiqui]

Wow... Vista looks super nice. I'm going to :love: the new look :).

[snoopy369]

LOL 3.11 theme would be quite cool :b:

[FrostyBoy]

yay, Microsoft finally hired some good artists.

[Aeson]

The breadcrumbs looks interesting. What's the sidebar look like?

(On a side note... what's the reasoning behind having the start bar at the bottom of the screen by default? I never got that. It's a mouse-user's tool, and putting it at the bottom makes sure it is as far away as possible from window-specific mouse functionality. Top or side (left is closer to window menus, right closer to window controls) would seem the only reasonable setups. Bottom seems to serve no useful purpose whatsoever, unless you're afraid your windows will fall off the bottom of the screen without something to hold them up?)

The visual stuff I would probably just turn off (or get rid of) wherever possible. Retro is definitely the way to go.

That status bar in explorer looks like a good waste of 10% of your screenspace. Having it turned on saves you from having to buy a smaller monitor I suppose... ;) (The window borders look a bit unnecessarily wide too.)

Thumbnails are against my religion. If I don't already know what's in a file, or where it's located, it's not important enough to be on my computer damn it! (Can you turn them off in alt-tab and revert to simply use the program icons? I know what's in the windows I have open too...)

How many of those services are default? Any idea how many are optional? Right now I have 24 running, counting FireFox, AV, and firewall.

One other question... is there a ..\program files\xerox\nwwia\ in Vista? :D

[Solver]

Yeah, visually, Vista is very appealing. Interesting that there's no XP look/theme - only the Vista and classic (pre-XP), from what I gather.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Asher
Also, benchmarks of XP vs Vista:

http://techgage.com/article/windows_vista_system_performance_reports

They're virtually identical, except Vista's slightly faster in disk speed.

You realize that article doesn't praise Vista, right? As it says, "I don't necessarily recommend Vista to anyone at this point in time, simply because it's not needed."

The benchmarks are pretty interesting. Better minimum disk read speed for Vista, almost everything else is slightly slower than XP (though, admittedly, the difference seems negligible most of the time). Those recoding tests are the only ones where Vista's slowness is non-negligible.

I would now like similar benchmarks from a single-core machine - given that this was ran on a dual-core, the results here should be better than on single-core tests.

[Adagio]

I just installed Vista, and so far I've got mixed feelings about it. I haven't tried any games yet (installing Civ IV right now), but one thing is for sure: I don't like the new control panel. I switched to classic view, but that doesn't make it feel like the classic control panel
The windows explorer also annoys me, but hopefully I'll get used to it

[Solver]

ADG, is the new Vista panel somehow less "classic" than the default XP one, then?

[Adagio]

But what annoys me the most about Vista is Nvidias drivers to it, I can't change any settings at all. Why is it that they have an Advanced view and Normal view, when there's no difference at all between those two?

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Solver
ADG, is the new Vista panel somehow less "classic" than the default XP one, then?

I never used the default control panel in XP either, I always switched to classic view

But it's not just the panel itself, but all the configuration windows you can open from there. In other versions of Windows you had one item in the control panel for your display options, now you have 5 :eek:

[Adagio]

Civ IV runs a bit worse than on XP, I have to play without AA on (I always have it on 4 in Civ IV) :(

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Adagio

I never used the default control panel in XP either, I always switched to classic view

Me too.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Aeson
One other question... is there a ..\program files\xerox\nwwia\ in Vista? :D

:lol: :lol:

No! :dance:

But there is a new root-level (hidden) folder called "ProgramData." Why they couldn't combine it with Program Files\Common Files or whatever is beyond me. There's also an annoying Program Files\Common Files\MSBuild folder, which in turn is about 4 sub-folders deep, with a grand total of 2 files totaling 11kb in size :angry:

[Asher]

Originally posted by Aeson
The breadcrumbs looks interesting. What's the sidebar look like?
Windows Sidebar? Attached.

(On a side note... what's the reasoning behind having the start bar at the bottom of the screen by default? I never got that. It's a mouse-user's tool, and putting it at the bottom makes sure it is as far away as possible from window-specific mouse functionality. Top or side (left is closer to window menus, right closer to window controls) would seem the only reasonable setups. Bottom seems to serve no useful purpose whatsoever, unless you're afraid your windows will fall off the bottom of the screen without something to hold them up?)
Because it's what most users prefer. It's best to have commonly-used controls at the edge of the screen, it's easier to get to them with the mouse. The window controls at the top of the screen are specific to the window open (minimize, maximize, restore, close), the ones at the bottom are for the system (start menu, task switching).


How many of those services are default? Any idea how many are optional? Right now I have 24 running, counting FireFox, AV, and firewall.
The vast majority of them.

[Solver]

What's that between the Toronto weather and the calendar?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Solver
What's that between the Toronto weather and the calendar?
Random photos from my photo directory.

[Asher]

The gadgets are not bound to the sidebar, but can be dragged to the desktop as well (and resized).

[Asher]

Windows Key + Spacebar overlays the sidebar over your current display.

[Asher]

That status bar in explorer looks like a good waste of 10% of your screenspace. Having it turned on saves you from having to buy a smaller monitor I suppose... (The window borders look a bit unnecessarily wide too.)
I quite like them, especially for media.

[Asher]

It can also be resized easily, it shows less information the smaller it is.

[Asher]

Or you can just turn it off completely.

[Asher]

There is also an optional preview bar on the ride to watch clips.

[Asher]

Preview pane works for a lot of different kinds of files, like Word Docs.

[Imran Siddiqui]

DROOL... wow, that looks incredible.

Originally posted by Adagio
But what annoys me the most about Vista is Nvidias drivers to it, I can't change any settings at all. Why is it that they have an Advanced view and Normal view, when there's no difference at all between those two?

NVidia has said that they'll release the Vista drivers on the 30th (official Vista release date). Why they can't release it now, no one knows and there is a lot of anger in the Nvidia forums about it.

Just wait until Tuesday and then you'll probably have all the functionality you require.


Furthermore, why go back to classic (ie, ugly) view? I don't use it for XP, so I'm not going to use it for Vista.

[LordShiva]

THe lack of decent Vista drivers for nVidia cards is, in fact, a big problem right now. No doubt it will be fixed, but it's rather annoying.

[Nostromo]

Asher has finally come out of the closet: he's a trekkie. :p

[Asher]

Originally posted by nostromo
Asher has finally come out of the closet: he's a trekkie. :p
I've never denied it. I used to be a huge ST nut. Haven't seen them for years, but the SO told me he hasn't seen ANY of the ST movies...so over Christmas break we watched 'em all.

Anyway, time for more pictures. I apologize in advance for the quality -- the camera's old and bad, had to turn off the flash to prevent glare, and they're a bit blurry...

[Asher]

The Xbox 360 is a "Media Centre Extender". Windows Vista comes with Media Center. As such...we've got a slick MCE interface.

Here's browsing music by album...I've got it connected to my LAN via a 100Mbps LAN connection. It's extremely responsive and quick to load everything, also very slick in terms of animations, etc.

Everything on the screen is extremely crisp. It's being displayed in native 1080p (1920x1080).

[Asher]

Viewing an album.

[Asher]

Playing an album...

[Asher]

When you do a "play slideshow", you can choose to have it show random pictures from your entire library, or sequential pictures from a specific library. You can still control your music, and it continues to play in the background with the display in the bottom (which can be turned off) displaying the current song.

[Asher]

Viewing music by artist...

[Asher]

Viewing music by year...

[Asher]

The sports section is cool. Would be cooler if it worked with my digicable box, but it's still useful for scores. Very slick interface.

[Asher]

Zooming in on a particular game's scores...

[Asher]

Viewing pictures by album...

[Asher]

Viewing pics in an album...

[Asher]

And finally, viewing pictures...There's a very nice effect where it does a subtle pan.

[Adagio]

Where is the real disk defragmenter located? So far I've only been able to find one program called that, but there's only one button? Clicking that button apparently starts the defragmenting (but which drive?) and I can't see how far it actually is :confused:



And how do you fix the problem with the weather gadget? It shows that I've picked the correct city, but apparently here at midnight the sun is shining, while all day it has just showed a moon :hmmm:

[Asher]

Originally posted by Adagio
Where is the real disk defragmenter located? So far I've only been able to find one program called that, but there's only one button? Clicking that button apparently starts the defragmenting (but which drive?) and I can't see how far it actually is :confused:
It defragments fine, it just doesn't have any fancy features (such as progress reports) so as to not poach sales from people like Symantec who are already making government complaints...

Just click the "Defragment" button, it defrags all of your HDs.

And I've no idea about your weather widget problem. Suggest you move to North America.

[Asher]

Have you set your time zone?

[LordShiva]

Just disable the Sidebar and use Konfabulator.