rockypath

原帖由 pkphilip 於 2008-12-11 13:19 發表
I removed UAC from Vista and stripped many of the function with vLite before installing it,...

Are you suggesting that I should remove UAC before re-installing my software?

Thinking about re-install all the software again make me headache.

grace4repair

Windows XP is powerful for normal user.
I used to run Autocad and large-scaled engineering calculation smoothly with a Pentium CPU and 1G memory.
There is no reason for me to switch to any other operation system.
It is just Microsoft's trick to get your money out of your pocket.
My principle for computer and software is "New doesn't mean good"
The manufacturers just keep giving you something you would never use, but persuade you to upgrade or replace your computer and peripherals.
Do buy their tricks.

Daniel
[url=http://grace4repair.pixnet.net/blog/post/24262519 ]Grace Computer Repair Workshop[/url]
Serving Richmond, BC and its adjacent areas

Hyde

原帖由 grace4repair 於 2008-12-17 19:02 發表
Windows XP is powerful for normal user.
I used to run Autocad and large-scaled engineering calculation smoothly with a Pentium CPU and 1G memory.
There is no reason for me to switch to any other opera ...

I could run Windows 3.11 with a 486... what's your point?

快樂牛郎

I am still using the computer from 7 years ago.

rockypath

The fate of Vista just like Windows 98 - short life.

Or Windows 2000?  don't know which one is shorter.

I really don't like MS style of rushing our a new OS every few years.

I have never been upset with MS much untill the time I was forced to use Vista (it comes with the new notebook I bough not long ago). It is to the point that I am thinking of getting rid of Vista and install an XP instead.

[ 本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2008-12-17 21:12 編輯 ]

pkphilip

Just removed/disabled UAC if you don't like the "Continue / Cancel" thing. Once it's off, it won't bother you anymore.

Vista is Windows ME. Only 3 years lifespan.

If you can't accept Vista now, you won't accept Windows 7 either. Since Vista is basically a crippled, early release of Windows 7; what will make you to accept it in 2010?

I think 7 years for an OS is a bit too long, caz people are so used to it. Maybe MS should follow the Mac way, by introducing a newer OS (minor upgrade) once every year, then they can slowly move people up yet still be able to their cash-grab. :-)

Let's look at Mac OS X. OS X 10.0 Cheeta is released in 2001, 10.1 Puma is released in 2002, 10.2 Jaguar in 2003, 10.3 Panther in 2004, 10.4 Tiger in mid 2005, 10.5 Leopard in late 2007, 10.6 Snow Leopard in 2009... each upgrade (0.1 increase in version #) cost $129 and each one offer certain cosmetic and functional changes. Finally after 3 OS upgrades, people would head out and buy a new Mac.. this is certainly a good way to slowly train people to accept newer OS and keep them happy. My question is... when will we see Mac OS XI...lol.

Philip

[ 本帖最後由 pkphilip 於 2008-12-18 01:26 編輯 ]

rockypath

I agree with you that 7 years is too long. However, I believe MS should be blamed for rushing out buggy OS before it is ready (at least to an acceptable and reasoable standard).

I wait almost 2 years before installing Win 98 just waited it became stable and service packs had plug most of the leak-holes. I skipped Windows ME/2000. This time, I also planned to skip Vista or wait for another year till it is stable.

Unfortunatly, I have to face it now.

Hyde

MS didnt rush Vista out, it took them far longer to develop then intended and Vista is as stable as XP.  Its just Vista demands a lot of new hardware.  those with Core 2 Duo and 2GB of ram are all happy with vista.   A lot of ppl refused to upgrade XP for the same reason.  

What Vista failed at was there was too many different versions and most notebook comes with home premium.  which sucks for business users as home premium can not connect to a domain.  and consumers didn't know what to choose.

Microsoft have to push out new OS that demands new hardware to keep the market growing.  

and you can't even compare ME and 2000, windows 2000 was not intended for consumer use and its was build off NT4 and its a far more stable platform then windows 9x.  windows XP is based of 2000.

rockypath

i believe the top issue for people (including myself) not accepting Vista is its compatibility. i don't want to upgrade all of my hardware and software just for being able to run on a new OS which i don't see much additional benefit compare to the one I already had and satisfied with.

i had to return a new laser printer i just bought (it is on Christams sales) for not being able to install the driver. i called the manufacturue and they told me that it is Microsoft's problem (Vista) and adviced me to call Microsoft for a solution. it took me a week trying to find a solution and at last i just returned it and wait till 2009.

just looking at how the business world rejecting Vista. MS even planned to stop XP in order to push the business society to upgrade to Vista. However, MS had to delay the plan since the business society was so upset with this decision.

peter236

原帖由 rockypath 於 2008-12-18 02:29 發表
I agree with you that 7 years is too long. However, I believe MS should be blamed for rushing out buggy OS before it is ready (at least to an acceptable and reasoable standard).

I wait almost 2 year ...

Comeon, Windows ME and Windows 2000 are totally different. Windows 98, ME, xp are for the consumers while Windows 2000/2003 Server are for businesses.

[ 本帖最後由 peter236 於 2008-12-18 15:25 編輯 ]