Vista

I was shocked to discover when wandering round Vatican City that the Pope is apparently a Catholic.

Funny you should mention that - just been listening to a recorded Milton Jones gig here:

Where, amongst other things, he talks about how some people like cats, and some people don't. And that the Pope, apparently, is a cataholic.

And bears do indeed relieve themselves in timber-rich environments.

Not as shocked as I was when wandering in a local national park, famous for its bear population, to discover that the woods show signs that the bears do not avail themselves of sensible indoor sanitary facilities?

+AD4- Is slow and shit.

What spec PC ?

Bollox to everyone, in my personal experience it's no slower than XP and is most stable MS OS I've used (on a quad-core, nowt special).

Let the flaming begin :)

Agreed. As long as things aren't messed with it seems the most stable windows.

There's a clue in 'quad core'.

On a 1.4GHz Core Duo it crawls.

And my Vista media player / downloader / streaming machine install is almost terminally corrupted.

I'd quite happily use 2k Pro if it could run the latest Media Player and browser.

Working fine here.

Seems fine here.

That's because of the prick using the computer.

Gosh, Vista no slower than an OS that runs like treacle.

I suspect you have different standards of 'fine'.

Compared with a G4 iBook running OSX it is very, very slow.

Compared with a 2.0GHz Mac with Core2Duo it's almost unusable.

It gets used maybe once a week, to watch streamed football games. Which is barely used at all - yet it still managed to f*ck up the Windows install, even though it sits there doing nothing 99% of the time.

Everything works.

Might as well compare apples and oranges.

I stand by my comment.

Why?

Both current consumer OSs.

Only one runs fine on ancient hardware, one struggles on relatively modern hardware.

The proof of the pudding is that hardly anyone has moved to Vista in a corporate environment. Everyone is holding out for Win 7.

Vista will be remembered as being a s**te upgrade to XP, just as Me was a s**te upgrade to 98.

It depends on the hardware being used to run it, really.

That aside, from what I've seen of Vista, MS have done a good job of adding lots of sparkly bits which in turn keep the more easily pleased happy.

And certainly the 'Home' versions are dumbed down in some respects compared to the XP equivalent to make it harder for the computing equivalents of Reg Prescott from fecking it all up by messing around with the registry etc.

But overall, it's not a good progression from XP really and is more resource hungry and temperamental as a result.

Most businesses are leaving it well alone and waiting for Windows 7 to rear its ugly head before deciding on which OS to progress to from XP.

Ah yes, the traditional Windows fanboi comment. "It's great and if it sucks it's your fault." Of course when the next release of Windows appears they all start to admit the faults of the previous version which turn out to be identical to the very faults that they previously denied the existence of.

They're kidding someone, but they don't realise it's themselves.

I'm not sure I agree with that all of the ones I work at started going to Vista after SP1 came out for there new desktops and Server 2008 (Vista with better networking and fewer flashy bits) for the bigger servers. There seems to have been a sensible wait till the first SP is out attitude emerging in these businesses so I can't see them going to 7 for another year or 18 months after it debus. Rolling upgrades are already being cut back as well with the recession so windows 7 could be in for a hard time in the corporate envyroment.

Any hardware on which Vista runs at less than a snail's pace will run XP faster and Linux so fast it will make your nose bleed.

Most of the businesses that I deal with are installing Linux for mission-critical applications. These are huge operations with data centers that must have high availability. There's no room in them for Vista. Most Windows users preen themselves on selecting an OS suitable for business. Meanwhile those businesses where performance and reliability are issues have moved on. SuSE and RedHat are where it's at nowadays.

And completely different.

Working just fine and dandy on my 2 year old laptop whereas your Apple is restricted to working with what hardware Steve Jobs tells you you can use.

Meaningless.

Win7 is Vista with a GUI update. Kernel is the same, driver model is the same, benchmarks are the same.

Technically, Win7 is the ME of Vista.

Yawn. Same was said about XP from Win98SE.