windows vista, page 1

guys what do u think about windows vista...will it be good or bad...i think it will be the worst shit made by microsoft...xp was awful...vista will be awfuller...thats my opinion

from what i've seen of it..i think its pretty good..its the apple OS X of windows..i downloaded RC2 but i haven't installed it yet, i'll tell u guys about it when i install it

well .. I agree with you except that vista will be better than xp cause they have stolen our past old features of Macintosh and applied them with their stupid way in coming vista like spotlight, calender and other stuff specially the interface and they got that funny bubble around the popular windows logo as if they are saying it will be secured   ... but you know what, it still windows, they still got Registery as the system core, they still got DLL HELL and they still got viruses, trojans and all this shit we all know

check this https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=253307780391983639 .. starting from the 20th minute you will fall from laughing

but honestly commi..respecting how great apple is and everything..i feel more comfortable using windows, as long as you know what your doing, you won't get viruses, and windows is much more flexible than Mac, there is a much larger number of programs made for windows only. and thats what's making me stick to windows. But since mac have introduced the intel based machines, and you can install windows on it, then i want that (like i said in the other topic)

but i think we should stick to this topic and talk about vista, and not mac, we've already disscussed mac a lot

As soon as I have some money I'm buying a Mac. The only reason why I still hadn't bough one was due to teh fact that you couldn't get pirated software for MACS. Seriously who's gonna pay $1100 for photoshop? Windows XP wasn't bad but when I compare it to Apple OS its a different level.

yeah it's a diffrent level for sure but i like windows more coz it's more easy to use i know that  Mac OS is more safe than windows but who cares just don't go on risk and it will be fine i like things to be easy Apple is really hard to use , and about windows vista it's awful alot of things makes u r computer go slower for nothing try xp home edition then switch to the vista thing u will c the diffrence in speed original edition is the best if u want somethin like vista u can install xp service pack 3

lol, just so you'd know..the current RC2 is as fast as windows XP, and it will still get faster when the final version arrives..so its not slow

i've installed rc2 too, it's fast enough if you have enough ram :) btw, xp gets slower as you install more patches (sp1,sp2,etc). vista is fast for now, but i think it'll get slower as they produce more patches for it, of course, just after releasing.. if you want to use windows anyway, the best solution would be installing a server operating system, like w2003 imho. microsoft doesn't own the server market like the desktop, so they can't afford their software getting slower and slower, it must be as fast as possible. unfortunately, most of the games don't run on 2003 8)

btw, about mac: i haven't used any before, but there were a guy who tried to prove how secure is his mac, and asked crackers to get into it (https://www.mckeay.net/secure/2006/03/mac_server_hacked.html)... they've cracked it in no time, using a 0day vulnerability... by this, i don't want to say mac is bad, but bugs and vulnerabilites exists in almost ANY system...

microsoft will need a half year the clear all bugs in vista...about mac i think its better...i dont use it but my father has one...its better for mixing   all famous Djs that are working with ableton to mix live are using macs....like Sasha Stephane K G-Pal i think Wally Lopez but i am not sure

yeah, and some famous djs play from cds nowadays, although many people says that "real djs" use vinyl...  please don't misunderstand my thoughts, EVERY platform has it's own bugs/errors/vulnerabilities and appliances 8)

you are right, but windows have TONS & TONS & TONS of endless shity errors and vulnerabilities while Mac (UNIX generally) has the least which is NO compared to windows .. and by the way, it's a very bad idea to invite anyone to hack into your system and by the way too, this Mac story you have talked about is such a LAME because, first, the web site or server author had enabled SSH which is always disabled by default in Mac OS, second and the really moron thing that no web servers can allow giving free shell accounts to anyone ask for a one !! ..  a powerful secured system is useless as long as a  stupid moron person is in charge of it, thats a fact. and after all it was friendly challenge anyway, but can you tell me how many times windows servers and machines all over the web got defaced, hacked, cracked and maybe slattered in every minute :) ?

I've used Windows Vista RC1 (Build 5600) and I read some articles talking about it and I was very impressed really, I know most of you people will not read all this post, but I gonna write what I think anyway, so let's just start a logical discussion, there was that Article https://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1842175,00.asp written by John Rizzo and I just want to discuss what he said.

This Article is comparing Tiger with Vista, it starts out pointing out all the things Vista will do which imitate Tiger, especially with the note of search, design and look-and-feel, though he also notes some rather irrelevant items, like the similarity between the names "Aero" and "Aqua," (the GUI names in Vista and Tiger) and the names for the "Network" and "Computer" areas. It does not talk about other more significant similarities, such as Internet Explorer suddenly become RSS tabbed browser with startling resemblance to Safari and even the same color scheme in calendar, moving the spotlight from the top right corner in Tiger to the bottom left corner in Vista


He started the article with a couple of false facts But I really get annoyed when the Mac is criticized for essentially not being Windows. One example is when the writer praises Microsoft: "Windows Vista will be superior to Tiger in terms of networking, mostly because Windows is a better client for Microsoft servers." In other words, Microsoft is better because it can communicate with itself better than Macs can communicate with it !!! How's that for Windows-centric? And it's not even always true, I have had easier time to connect a Mac to a Windows network than I have had connecting a Windows machine to a Windows network. There are certainly fewer steps involved with the Mac, to be certain.

The writer also says a great deal about archiving and searching, virtual folders and stacking, but fails to mention the vital fact that much of this depends on the WinFS file management system, which has been delayed and will not be available until 2008. Which means that Vista users will have a relatively hollow shell of these features, most of which are already available in Tiger, and yet the author here uses them as examples of how Vista will outshine Tiger (didnt even mention Leopard). Really ? When ? Three to four years after the fact? He even mentions the use of "stacks" in file management--an idea Apple has been developing since 2000.

What's even more funny is when the writer concludes, saying that the next version of the Mac OS, Leopard, "will need to be a compelling alternative to Vista." In other words, Apple better catch up with Microsoft pretty work, considering that not only has Tiger achieved a year and a half early what Vista promises later, but that much of what Tiger can do now won't be available on Vista for another two and a half years, well after Leopard has been released.  

And what really brought me to the ground from much laughing      in this article: although it does mention Leopard near the end, it is overall a comparison between Tiger and Vista, an already-released Mac OS and a future version of Windows that won't be released before Tiger itself is obsolete! Think of comparing Mac OS X Jaguar with Windows Me, or even Windows 98; a fair comparison? Please.

Considering the fact that the Mac has always been way ahead of Windows, this kind of reverse-logic comparison smacks of revisionism before the fact. You have to admit, if you have to go so far as to compare a 2008 version of Windows (pretending it'll be complete in late 2006) with a mid-2005 version of Mac OS in order to make Microsoft seem even marginally comparable ... well, that speaks volumes as to Who Comes Out Ahead. :)

3 words..very well said

this guy is a windows lover...bout somethings he is right but 70 % of what he is saying is a LOL  
microsoft copied everything from mac coz the have no idea what to do...XP was a shit...if they try to develop it to something better it will be a DISASTER .... dont u think...so the have no choise they have to do something new...and to make their work easier they use COPY/PASTE

Looks like everyone hates an os of their choice. I would love to have a mac. They have a really sleek look to them and when im in miami at ultra thats all i see every dj with is a mac..their suppose to be safer too. Although im REALLY scared of the transformation of learning a new os. Linux was hard enough and i dont really know how to use it. I can do everything on most distros but i dont feel proficient and comfortable like i do with windows. Anyways Viktor1983 said he installed rc2 and it worked fine.. So does anyone have a reliable download link they would supply for me...

i tried to get you the link i used to download, but for some reason it takes me to microsoft's RC1 webpage..seems like they decided not to make it available for download? you can always try torrents. its size should be 2.49GB for the 32-bit, and ~3.5GB for the 64-bit