| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Tonto Auri
   |
Posted - 2007.06.18 22:59:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: kakmonstret
It depends on what you value I don't want my OS to screw me over more then XP does today so I will never install the Digital Restrictions Management(DRM) riddled OS that vista is on any of my computers. The day XP becomes impossible to run (plan for this day people it will happen) I will go GNU/Linux all the way and if I can't get games to run on it too bad for the games industry. I sure hope the games industry comes to their senses regarding sitting in MS technology prison. Because I really like to play games but giving that much control to MS is NOT an option.
Sorry for long quote for short answer, but still..
/signed
I sit on W2k right now, waiting for linux client to migrate totally out from Microhell.
--
Thanks CCP for cu<end of sig> |
jamm
Art of War.
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 12:26:00 -
[32]
well I choose and use Vista for more than one reason that suits me best. - XP was a little deflated, whilst Vista is fresh, sure I agree that drivers need to be discovered in a better way for some H/W types but support is getting a lot better now. - People seem to hate vista because the next person does. - XP has been around for a long time so you are comfy with your feet on the chair. as with vista your not right now. - just takes times to settle. but DO give it a chance as it does have its benefits. - and for me those are performance in almost all areas.
------------------------------------------------
Target!, Lock... er no, LOCK, EJECT!, noo. its Target, Lock, warp? .. Target, Lock, EJECT!...ok ok, Pass me the mining laser.... |
Neena Valdi
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 12:30:00 -
[33]
XP until Microsoft release SP1 and SP2 for Vista.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 12:50:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Sine Tamar
Sure Vista isn't much better that XP *right now* But do you remember what XP was right after release? it was UTTER CRAP! that's what it was, it took a few years and SP2 to make it "decent"
I know this post is over a month old.
But anyway, It's been years since Windows 2000, and XP still isn't better than it in any significant way.
|
Darteis Elosia
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 13:38:00 -
[35]
I'd definitly say Vista. There is so much software out there that doenst run on Vista nativly. And frankly i don't like this DRM crap they put in. My father has Vista on his new notbook and there is problems with just about everything he wants do do. Mainly becuae he has to use software meant for XP in order to perform hotsyncs with his smartphone etc.
My mother got Vista on her new OEM computer too, and there is also alot of problems with it. Mostly becuase the OEM sulton was interfering in someway but still, they need to get **** straight before they put it out.
Stick with XP, it wont hog all your RAM..
I could puke on vista.
|
Daydream Bear
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 03:05:00 -
[36]
Originally by: RuriHoshino
There are several elements of the interface that are just stupid (for instance, the "Power Off" button in the start menu does not, in fact, turn the computer off).
I think it's unfair to call this a negative point for Vista, considering the fact that the user can easily change this button so that it does in fact shut down the computer.
I actually prefer that my computer enters S3 standby rather than shut down completely, so I find this a convenient feature.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.07.25 12:46:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Daydream Bear
Objection: This statement is relative to the end-user's own needs.
That's the problem, nothing actually needs XP that won't work in 2000. With the exception of things that have recently been made to force the person to use XP, those usually require a small edit to work on 2000.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |