Windows Vista

I'm soon to install the beta R1 of Vista and I was wondering if that would be a bad decision i mean would anything be totally wrong? plus I heard somewhere that you cant pirate anymore after installing Vista, is that true?

Do you mean RC1?

I recently installed it on my iMac and came away very impressed. I had very few issues with it being buggy besides a few minor graphical glitches and the fact it hangs when I try to shut it down. I don't know if I'd trust it as my everyday OS just yet, but it's not bad. Definitely close to being final.

As for piracy, I dunno lol. I used a serial for Windows Vista Ultimate and it didn't bug me about activation or anything.

no I'm talking about torrents and the like. I've already got my activation code

Well duh, no. How can they stop you downloading a torrent?

hey while I was signing up it said something about not being able to use it anymore after the final release is out. is that true? and how do you dual boot, is it a simple process or will I have to look the whole thing up myself? and how much hard drive space will it take?

I don't know about the rest, but it uses about 7gb once installed and I believe it won't let you install without a 15gb partition.

>>6
SEVEN JIGGABYTES?!?

My Ubuntu is using a grand total of 4 gigs, and that's for the enormous volumes of software I have installed on it.

>>7 my ubuntu took up ~20niggabytes. :(

>>8
Lies.

My desktop Gentoo box install takes up only 4.3GB.  And that's with a huge amount of shit installed.  Notably: the full GNOME and KDE meta packages (meaning they include all the packaged apps, like media players, editors, browsers, games, etc), XFCE4, Fluxbox, FVWM-Crystal, XGL/Compiz/CGWD, Blender, GIMP, Inkscape, Firefox, Opera, amaroK, K3b, Cedega, Wine, Azureus, Audacity, Rosegarden, Kino, Blender, mplayer/mplayer-bin, VLC, XMMS, Abiword, OpenOffice.org, and a whole shitload of smaller apps.  My world file is 240 lines long, for crying out loud.

On the other hand, my laptop's Gentoo install is only 400MB and kept small so that I can just load the entire OS into memory and I've still got xfce4 with XGL/Compiz and my most commonly used apps installed.  My simple file server has an install of about 200MB.

>>8
What is this faggotry?!

>>10
maybe he didn't separate /home and root into separate partitions

MY OPERATING SYSTEM USES UP 350 MEGS AND MY RAM USAGE IS ALWAYS UNDER 50 KILOBYTES FAP FAP FAP

It's doesn't actually matter that much anymore. Macs come with like 15gb used up by default and who cares? You get all sorts of cool stuff for free with it (iDVD and Garageband take up like 5gb of that by themselves, but iPhoto\iMovie, Pages\Keynote\Office trials, and a large array of other Apple apps take up even more. But nobody complains about this, because the apps are useful and cool and oddly enough in the world of 250gb+ desktop hard drives 15gb is not that much anymore.

Vista's 7gb includes a bunch of new, useful apps - MS are doing what Apple does, and providing a more comprehensive photo library, media centre interface, DVD creator, mail client, and other assorted utilities for free out of the box. It's not a bad thing!

I consider all this analogous to the idea that "OMG MY OPERATING SYSTEM IS USING UP ALL MY FREE RAM MAN WHAT THE FUCK BLOAT!!!!" Hardware has pushed way ahead of OS development and we need to start using all this extra capacity for caching, smart new OS-level features and high quality bundled apps.

If you want to run xfce on a streamlined linux kernel and pump your cock as you watch your terminal window display 2040mb free ram and 0.04% max CPU usage on your dual core processor, go do that, but the rest of the world is forging ahead and doesn't actually care if Spotlight uses up a hundred megabytes to store an instant search index - because it's useful!

Hardware has pushed way ahead of OS development and we need to start using all this extra capacity for caching, smart new OS-level features and high quality bundled apps.
Yeah, except that's not happening.

Those programs you've listed aren't worth 7GB. Shit, they shouldn't even take 1GB.

Windows' minimum requirements have ballooned by several orders of magnitude over the past decade, and for what? Where's my fucking several-orders-of-magnitude-better OS, huh?

　　　　　　　　　　　　 　／￣∧＿∧￣￣￣ //￣＼＼
　　　　　　 ＿＿ ⊂／＿＿（´∀｀　）_＿　　/_⊃＿__|　|＼フ ヽ　　CFLAGS JUST KICKED
　　　,　 ´＿　　／　　　／￣￣ ＿_　／￣　ヽ　　　 __ヽ￣￣　|　　IN, YO!
　　/∠__／―/-。―／――∠＿／＿_∧　　| 　 　　　 | ∧＿.|　
　　,========――´=========＝===/⌒ヽ=|.===＝＝| | ヽ￣〕　
　 |　＿　　 |GENTOO| 　　 ＿ 　″ 　|⌒|　|/　　　_＿ /|　 ）ノ　　　　vroom
　 ）_旧＿∈≡≡≡≡∋＿旧＿″＿||　ノ丿＿ -――┘ 丿　　　　　　vroom!
　　 ＼　＼＿ノ ￣￣￣三三三＼　＼＿ノ　　　　三三三三　
　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三三
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　三三三三三三三三三三三

>>9
Why in the FUCK do you have SIX window managers installed on your Gentoo box?

>>13
Windows' minimum requirements have ballooned by several orders of magnitude over the past decade, and for what? Where's my fucking several-orders-of-magnitude-better OS, huh?
No fucking shit. XP is astronomical in size and computing requirements compared to 98, and yet it feels like the same shitty OS. If you're going to eat my entire CPU, HDD and RAM, you'd better suck me off and cook me breakfast. Otherwise, just having the resources to spare is no excuse for the OS to waste it.

>>15
get a mac already.

>>13
I understand, Microsoft aren't exactly doing the greatest job, they should offer more for the 7gb and they do code a lot of bloated stuff. I haven't actually checked what the 7gb is "spent on", though I can at least talk about the Mac - the OS is now something like 4gb, and for that you get all these amazing frameworks and features for developers to use, a whole bunch of useful partitioning, syncing, screen capturing, colour matching, task automating utilities, an illustrated dictionary, thesaurus and spellcheck function, high quality calendaring\contacts\IM\mail apps, blah blah blah. While of course they could be smaller and more efficient, in a way they don't really need to be and if you're not nitpicking too harshly you can see a lot of improvements in the OS to justify the creep in install size. And with prices at well under 50 cents a gigabyte, does it even matter?

Vista might not be all of the way there, but if you poke around the beta you'll note there sure is a lot more bundled free stuff than there is in XP, and I'd imagine the new frameworks that underpin the OS like Avalon would be providing the fundamentals for future stuff that justifies a larger install.

>>15
I get your point, but I think you're pushing the "XP is just like 98" and "taking up my whole CPU, HDD and RAM" points a little far. XP is not as good as it should be, but I don't find it that outrageous that my virtual machine of XP is 1gb, for instance. It's true XP isn't 10x better than 98 for 10x the hard drive space, but seeing as we're not using Pentium Pros anymore it might not be of such importance.

It dosent matter what you like and dislike. In the real world you have to know how to use microsoft products, especialy if you have a job in the tech sector. Like it or lump it, even if Vista is a huge pile of shit, a giant screw up, or anything else bad, it will still be adopted by busness and tech geeks.

>>17
Based on what I hear from some developers on the Apple side of the fence, whatever is in OSX might actually be worth it. What I'm hearing from them makes me really, really want to get a Mac.

Windows? Fuck that. The APIs are all nasty pieces of evil evilness, most from some whimsey ideas in the early 90s. And no matter how hard I try, nothing I've seen that's coming in Vista interests me.

Which is hilarious when you think that Microsoft has generally been good at producing developer tools. What's up with that?

>>1
Lol loser, stick to what you have or you'll suffer dearly.

>>4
They can. Google "treacherous computing" or "trusted computing".

>>5
Of course. Vista comes with Microsoft's malware/spyware to enforce this.

>>6
Wow, talk about a bloated OS. Windows Vista really is the worst piece of shit Microsoft could ever come up with.

Read what >>13 says. It's not a matter of having enough hardware, it's a matter of using it in a reasonable manner. It's stupid to waste RAM just because it's cheap (in the end, it'll work slower than a better OS, as it'll have less free RAM for the system cache). It's stupid to waste HD space just because it's cheap (in the end, you'll end up with a larger OS to backup and maintain, and millions more possbile points of failure). It's stupid to waste video acceleration (in the end, you end up buying a better video card or having an UI that works like Windows 2000 did in a 486, where moving windows weren't smooth, not that it looks great anyways, and you also end up stressing your video card more than you did, shortening its lifespan and  wasting power and requiring the fan to work faster all the time).

And most of all, it's stupid to install Windows Vista, unless you love getting your ass raped with DRM and Microsoft's malware.

>>17
The new features that come with Windows Vista are not only crippled, oversimplified and partly useless, but they are also provided by free applications you can run on Windows 2000 or XP for 1/100 the resource requirements, no OS upgrade, and no DRM AIDS.

>>18
My company used Windows for half-60% of the PCs, but decided not to purchase Windows Vista and to abandon Windows when forced to. IBM (yeah, that small one) decided to do the same. Looks like Microsoft will not rape us this time.

And "tech geeks"? Do you even know what's a geek like? You think "tech geeks" are those guys you see at Walmart buying a Microsoft keyboard and a legitimate copy of Windows? Tech geeks are already using Linux, or a stripped down version of the Windows NT OS of their choice, but I have yet to see a geek moving to Windows DRM.

>>Windows? Fuck that. The APIs are all nasty pieces of evil evilness, most from some whimsey ideas in the early 90s. And no matter how hard I try, nothing I've seen that's coming in Vista interests me.
I'm a Mac fag and I'm pretty scared of Vista. It catches up to OS X in most ways and does a good job of emulating its functionality. Okay, it's not as sleek and modern and lunix as OS X, but it is forging ahead with new APIs and some ideas that Apple aren't yet approaching (Avalon is probably the easiest I can mention.) It's definitely going to be flawed and have problems as Windows always does, but it's in general a big step forward and quite impressive if you're moving up from XP. If 10.5 hasn't got some really awesome hidden features to come, Microsoft have made MacOS mostly irrelevant to the non-geek as a reason to switch, as Vista does most of the things OS X does, reasonably well.

>>20
Yes, because Palladium got so far with massive public support - oh wait it got scaled back massively and none of the questionable ideas are happening anymore. You can have your nightmarish fantasies if you wish but censorship and service blocking are always going to be on the ISP end, not on your OS. If you want to continue rambling on about this point, name an obnoxious part of liberty-threatening "DRM" in Vista? All I can think of is genuine advantage and that's not really very frightening at all, just irritating (and easily cracked.)

Also, your statement that moving shit to the graphics card is a bad idea shows how backwards you are. Go use OS X for a short amount of time and you'll soon figure out that a smooth, transformable GPU-rendered desktop is more featureful, robust and extensible than a hacked-together fully-software 2D system with flickery updates and messy redrawing routines that don't let you do anything like expose, spaces, or even the taskbar previews of Vista (all useful window management tools.) I thought you Lunix faggots were starting to appreciate what Apple did in 2002 with that Xgl stuff, anyway? I guess there's still a few more of the "OMG WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT MY GRAPHICS CARD IS AT MORE THAN 1.3% LOAD AVERAGE AGHHHHH THE FANS ARE AT 300RPM AND CLIMBING" types out there, but seriously, move on.

>>21
Commandline (textmode) = fastest redraw times

>>18
Wonderful failure. Tech geeks a) already know everything about Vista before they even touch it, because it's made for idiots; b) already use Linux distros, and will never move to Windows. You'd have to be crazy to switch to Vista now.

>>21
I don't agree with >>20, but I don't agree with you either. Yes, a hardware accelerated desktop is nice, but you don't need a state of the art graphics card and seven fucking gigs to accomplish that. It's wasteful and inefficient, especially when compared to minimalistic window managers such as Xfce.

GUIs suck sure you don't need to read man pages but they just get to be inefficient, they waste resources and they are MOUSE-BASED which means they are UNSCRIPTABLE.

I'm a Mac fag and I'm pretty scared of Vista.
Don't be. Have you actually used the Vista rc?

The interface is so hilariously braindead that it's no longer hilarious.

It's like they took the worst parts of XP, and decided to make it horribly demonic by trying to copy OSX but completely failing. The dialogs in particular are pure lol.

quite impressive if you're moving up from XP
I, and most other geeks it seems, aren't impressed. I suspect XP or 2k3 will be the last Windows I use. Considering how large my software library is, I'm not saying that lightly.

>>12

Sounds like some one paid by Microsoft to come in here and convert us over to Windows because of all its shiny new points and new features, and its moving us into the new century where all other OS's have not! All the while MS does this at the cost of extensive and unecessary hardware usage and CPU,RAM,HDD load.

Does anybody really need these "features"? Out of what Vista has, I already had everyting I need in Windows 2000 plus open sauce, or just Lunix. People who think these are new and now they suddenly "need" them are retards.

Guys, you can make Vista right now without waiting for Microsoft.

It's easy:
a) Start with a fresh install of XP SP2.
b) Append a few megs of random gibberish to each executable.
c) Throw in a few gigs of files that don't do anything.
d) Infect your machine with a few dozen viruses to slow things down.

Et voila!

>>25
I, and most other geeks it seems, aren't impressed. I suspect XP or 2k3 will be the last Windows I use. Considering how large my software library is, I'm not saying that lightly.
My thoughts exactly.


>>28
You forgot the spyware.