First look at the next windows
http://www.istartedsomething.com/20071019/eric-talk-demo-windows-7-minwin/
Well the kernal at least :)
IF (and tbf its a bloody big "if") its on time that leaves Vista with a 3 year shelflife.
Yeah but you will get the usual three years of delays while they put all the additional and totally useless bling in.
Quote from: SeriousYeah but you will get the usual three years of delays while they put all the additional and totally useless bling in.
Microsoft are back tracking big style on vista
This week You have had the new pcmark software coming out and showing vista to have a lot of memory issues, MS have had to admit to a number of memory leaks in many areas (the clock and gadget stuff is leaking like crazy)
And things like extending xp life support and more being added to sp3 then before and news that The next windows Microsoft have hired a load more staff for it and apparent rumours of them being told to get a move on it
I am still going to keep to my comment about another version of Vista emerging at some point as what I heard seemed creditable
A striped down version of vista being labelled as a vista gaming
Quote from: neXusQuote from: SeriousYeah but you will get the usual three years of delays while they put all the additional and totally useless bling in.
Microsoft are back tracking big style on vista
This week You have had the new pcmark software coming out and showing vista to have a lot of memory issues, MS have had to admit to a number of memory leaks in many areas (the clock and gadget stuff is leaking like crazy)
And things like extending xp life support and more being added to sp3 then before and news that The next windows Microsoft have hired a load more staff for it and apparent rumours of them being told to get a move on it
I am still going to keep to my comment about another version of Vista emerging at some point as what I heard seemed creditable
A striped down version of vista being labelled as a vista gaming
There is already a stripped down version of vista, its called Vista Home Basic.
Or heck... Vista Starter Edition if you happen to live in a 3rd world country.
Vista Gaming... wtf... why would they do that? when any fool can open up the add/remove programs and remove the sh*t that causes slow crap on vista?
3 years shelf life is about right imo for an OS. XP is very very dated what having come out in 2000 7 years? my god... its like a piece of poo that just wont go down, you flush and flush, and pump that handle so you get enough pressure to flush before the cistern is full again, but it just refuses to go away.
Its time to retire XP thats for sure. SP3 in my opinion would be a mistake, a big one. They need to bite the bullet, sort out any known issues with Vista and start acting like its an operating system they are proud of, instead of trying to appease the masses and offer wishywashy opinions of both Vista and XP.
"Vista is amazing.. you should all upgrade"
"Of course... theres a new service pack coming for XP, and well those not happy with vista... yeah downgrade! use XP!!! its great."
ffs.. choose a line and go with it.
Quote from: M3ta7h3ad3 years shelf life is about right imo for an OS. XP is very very dated what having come out in 2000 7 years? my god... its like a piece of poo that just wont go down, you flush and flush, and pump that handle so you get enough pressure to flush before the cistern is full again, but it just refuses to go away.
The trouble is M$ have had constipation waiting for the replacement and its a huge turd that wont fit into the toilet bowl. People would rather not pay the gates tax until they have to and generally speaking XP isnt that bad. OK not as good as 3.11 was but we cant have everything :mrgreen:
Quote from: M3ta7h3adThere is already a stripped down version of vista, its called Vista Home Basic.
Or heck... Vista Starter Edition if you happen to live in a 3rd world country.
Vista Gaming... wtf... why would they do that? when any fool can open up the add/remove programs and remove the sh*t that causes slow crap on vista?
3 years shelf life is about right imo for an OS. XP is very very dated what having come out in 2000 7 years? my god... its like a piece of poo that just wont go down, you flush and flush, and pump that handle so you get enough pressure to flush before the cistern is full again, but it just refuses to go away.
Its time to retire XP thats for sure. SP3 in my opinion would be a mistake, a big one. They need to bite the bullet, sort out any known issues with Vista and start acting like its an operating system they are proud of, instead of trying to appease the masses and offer wishywashy opinions of both Vista and XP.
"Vista is amazing.. you should all upgrade"
"Of course... theres a new service pack coming for XP, and well those not happy with vista... yeah downgrade! use XP!!! its great."
ffs.. choose a line and go with it.
You do not follow the meaning of stripped down, not applications and windows bits and bobs from add remove, lol.
Basic is far from stripped down, it still has many of the bloated features
Everyone hates vista in the industry for things that matter, the like dx10 but then Microsoft has gone and f**ked that up by having the dx10.x which the card makers apparently hate
Methinks they should just release DX10 for XP.
The problem with getting rid of XP is that XP does enough for most people, hell Win98SE is actually good enough for most users. I want to know WHY Vista is so slow. Its based on the Win2k3 codebase, and that is actually pretty responsive. Im using XP64, again based on the Win2k3 Codebase. XP64, Vista and Win2k3 are all the same product with different front-ends bolted onto them. XP64 flies along without a care in the world, but Vista really does crawl in comparison.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/10/19/Microsoft-shows-shaved-down-kernel-for-next-Windows_1.html
TBH Vista is far too resource hungry for its own good. There has to be a good pruning.
Quote from: BeakerThe problem with getting rid of XP is that XP does enough for most people, hell Win98SE is actually good enough for most users. I want to know WHY Vista is so slow. Its based on the Win2k3 codebase, and that is actually pretty responsive. Im using XP64, again based on the Win2k3 Codebase. XP64, Vista and Win2k3 are all the same product with different front-ends bolted onto them. XP64 flies along without a care in the world, but Vista really does crawl in comparison.
Not many people give xp64 any credit but they should be, It had driver issues and the odd one now becuase it is 64bit but as you say it is probably the most stable operating system I have ever had, it is rock solid goes on and stuff that is not 64bit supported (like games) run like it was normal xp and becuase it is 64 In the years I have had it I did have 1 dodgy thing on my computer but could not run as it was 32bit and was a doddle to remove and I have been virus free for bloody ages
Best OS for me so far this.
Quote from: White GiantMethinks they should just release DX10 for XP.
It would admit defeat on vista for MS but it would also mean $$$$$$ They are pushing for pc gaming to come back as it has dipped recently to be quite poor with "games for windows" if they got dx10 on sp3 it would mean a lot more games sales for me and developers would be happy as well and it is possible with the hacks about and a fully MS made dx10 for xp I bet you if you had games compared to vista you would have a far better performance rate hands down
There is also a addon hack thing for xp you can get to convert the search, its a hack so not perfect but also shows the faster and better vista search can run on xp also.
Hopefully with this kernal being smaller and speedier MS will make the next windows with the concepts of mac os.... I mean vista and the core of xp (concept and speed) in mind
Quote from: neXusQuote from: BeakerThe problem with getting rid of XP is that XP does enough for most people, hell Win98SE is actually good enough for most users. I want to know WHY Vista is so slow. Its based on the Win2k3 codebase, and that is actually pretty responsive. Im using XP64, again based on the Win2k3 Codebase. XP64, Vista and Win2k3 are all the same product with different front-ends bolted onto them. XP64 flies along without a care in the world, but Vista really does crawl in comparison.
Not many people give xp64 any credit but they should be, It had driver issues and the odd one now becuase it is 64bit but as you say it is probably the most stable operating system I have ever had, it is rock solid goes on and stuff that is not 64bit supported (like games) run like it was normal xp and becuase it is 64 In the years I have had it I did have 1 dodgy thing on my computer but could not run as it was 32bit and was a doddle to remove and I have been virus free for bloody ages
Best OS for me so far this.
XP64 was chocked by bad support from M$ and other computer companies. If they had made it the preferred item then plenty more people might have went the 64bit route.
Quote from: SeriousQuote from: neXusQuote from: BeakerThe problem with getting rid of XP is that XP does enough for most people, hell Win98SE is actually good enough for most users. I want to know WHY Vista is so slow. Its based on the Win2k3 codebase, and that is actually pretty responsive. Im using XP64, again based on the Win2k3 Codebase. XP64, Vista and Win2k3 are all the same product with different front-ends bolted onto them. XP64 flies along without a care in the world, but Vista really does crawl in comparison.
Not many people give xp64 any credit but they should be, It had driver issues and the odd one now becuase it is 64bit but as you say it is probably the most stable operating system I have ever had, it is rock solid goes on and stuff that is not 64bit supported (like games) run like it was normal xp and becuase it is 64 In the years I have had it I did have 1 dodgy thing on my computer but could not run as it was 32bit and was a doddle to remove and I have been virus free for bloody ages
Best OS for me so far this.
XP64 was chocked by bad support from M$ and other computer companies. If they had made it the preferred item then plenty more people might have went the 64bit route.
Yeah, I think with vista apparently being not to far away they decided not to bother and I bet some wish they had supported it a bit more now including MS
Quote from: SeriousXP64 was chocked by bad support from M$ and other computer companies. If they had made it the preferred item then plenty more people might have went the 64bit route.
its pretty good these days for driver support, some of the more obscure hardware has problems, but it does for Vista as well.
XP64 shoulda got more love.
What amazes me is the cold boot difference between 2.x and xp.
that vid brings back memories, i used to use windows 2. first pc i ever had.
Quote from: DEViANCEthat vid brings back memories, i used to use windows 2. first pc i ever had.
TURBO BUTTON FTW
Quote from: DEViANCEthat vid brings back memories, i used to use windows 2. first pc i ever had.
Ive used windows 2 but the first one I owned was 3.11, although the machine was loaded with the 3.1 version when supplied. A massive 2MB of memory that cost me £70 to double. This made 3.11 useable, you could get it to work in 2MB but it was like Vista in 512MB. Even with 4MB it was never particularly fast but the 33Mhz 386SX processor had a lot to do with that.