Page 2 of 3
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:40 pm
by Tormentius
Denz wrote:
When there are security issues to address with their OS then they should keep addressing them so people are safe to use their product, not just discontinue updating the product because they have a better product on the market. Lets look on how many computers I have just in my office (6) each of which has a legal copy of XP, at $300 a piece that is too much cash to be doling out every couple of years. When Vista comes out then I have to be forced to buy 6 more copies? (or a version that will put Vista on all of my computers legaly - which may cost more) my point is that people who bought XP should at least keep it 5 years after their purchase, not 2.
People are free to keep XP for five years but expecting a vendor to pour resources and money into writing updates for a dated OS isn't realistic. They'll support XP Pro (which is what businesses are supposed to be using) for longer than the end of this year anyways so don't panic. Businesses can also save a lot of cash by taking advantage of software assurance and volume licensing.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:47 pm
by dmmh
another XP service pack is scheduled half of next year afaik, so no need to worry
furthermore, the plans to support XP Home only to the end of this year are based on a old 'roadmap', where XP would have been released years earlier then it actually was, much like Vista (and Blackcomb) is years later then it should be
Expecting all people to switch to Vista within the same year of release is un-realistic and they will never stop support for XP at the end of the year, so cut the drama
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:52 pm
by +JuggerNaut+
eepberries wrote:Denz wrote:That should be against the law, they should support their product at least 5 years after the purchase date. You can't just stop supporting your software on the hopes of the customer buying your new product because of it. I think the FCC should get involved here. You think?
Why is there any reason it should be illegal? I mean, I agree that it's lame, but I really don't see why it should be illegal. Take video games for example. Some companies just release the game and then that's it. They move onto their next project. They might have one or two updates to fix a couple problems, but besides that, they're done with it. I don't see why Microsoft doing this would be any worse
you cannot compare patches for some stupid game to security patches to one's operating system.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:59 pm
by shadd_
can't see it happening for a few years after vista has been out.
imagine most of the internet running exploited machines. it would be fucked.
vista will have to become the majority os firstly.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:00 pm
by +JuggerNaut+
ding.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:25 pm
by eepberries
I still don't think it matters. Just because Microsoft makes a more advanced and detailed product than video game companies do doesn't mean there should be special laws for them.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:28 pm
by dmmh
sure, who's talking about laws?
get a c.l.u.e
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:32 pm
by Denz
I hope they support XP for long like everyone here say's. That would be nice. Well look at Windows 98 it was supported up until last year. I hope this will be the same for XP when the time comes.
Since I have pro I won't worrie about it till it happens, you guys had me worried there for a moment.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:32 pm
by eepberries
Apparently Denz was.
Denz wrote:That should be against the law, they should support their product at least 5 years after the purchase date. You can't just stop supporting your software on the hopes of the customer buying your new product because of it. I think the FCC should get involved here. You think?
:icon26:
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:33 pm
by Denz
eepberries wrote:Apparently Denz was.
:icon26:
I believe everything on the internet don't you know.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:23 pm
by Zyte
so how is teriba? :/
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:25 am
by mjrpes
eepberries wrote:primaltheory wrote:eepberries wrote:
Why is there any reason it should be illegal? I mean, I agree that it's lame, but I really don't see why it should be illegal. Take video games for example. Some companies just release the game and then that's it. They move onto their next project. They might have one or two updates to fix a couple problems, but besides that, they're done with it. I don't see why Microsoft doing this would be any worse
nobody likes those games anyway...If they keep this up, they will slowly loose more people to linux...
I say by 2010 we will have easy to use guis for linux (like easy for old people and such) and windows won't be as dominating, and the successful companies will make stuff for both os's
Linux is stupid. People should face the fact that Linux just isn't for end users. I don't think Linux will ever replace Windows when it comes to the end user market. If anything does, it won't be Linux. Get over it
Linux is stupid? Did you have a bad experience or something? Judging by the phenomenal growth and maturity of the linux GUI over the last couple of years, I think linux is doing very well. Many people only care about computers as long as they can check email, browse the internet, write up a document, play their music, etc. For people like this, Linux can fit this bill nicely.
The biggest stumbling block right now is game and application support. That's the reason why I'm tied to Windows right now. But whose to say, given the growth of linux over the past ten years, what things will be like in another ten.
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:34 am
by booker
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:44 am
by glossy
mjrpes wrote:eepberries wrote:primaltheory wrote:
nobody likes those games anyway...If they keep this up, they will slowly loose more people to linux...
I say by 2010 we will have easy to use guis for linux (like easy for old people and such) and windows won't be as dominating, and the successful companies will make stuff for both os's
Linux is stupid. People should face the fact that Linux just isn't for end users. I don't think Linux will ever replace Windows when it comes to the end user market. If anything does, it won't be Linux. Get over it
Linux is stupid? Did you have a bad experience or something? Judging by the phenomenal growth and maturity of the linux GUI over the last couple of years, I think linux is doing very well. Many people only care about computers as long as they can check email, browse the internet, write up a document, play their music, etc. For people like this, Linux can fit this bill nicely.
The biggest stumbling block right now is game and application support. That's the reason why I'm tied to Windows right now. But whose to say, given the growth of linux over the past ten years, what things will be like in another ten.
It has improved by leaps and bounds, but it's still shit. Seriously.
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:47 am
by Guest
Is Vista faster than winxp?
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:49 am
by booker
ToxicBug wrote:Is Vista faster than winxp?
it boots faster but thats just a hack you can do on XP
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:53 am
by Guest
booker wrote:ToxicBug wrote:Is Vista faster than winxp?
it boots faster but thats just a hack you can do on XP
More info about the hax please
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:57 am
by primaltheory
ToxicBug wrote:booker wrote:ToxicBug wrote:Is Vista faster than winxp?
it boots faster but thats just a hack you can do on XP
More info about the hax please
microsoft bootvis?
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:18 am
by Dave
Having actually used Vista, it is much more than XP, and except for the accelerated gui, it's not a Mac.
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:26 am
by Guest
Can someone list the cool things about vista? I might acquire it if there are some significant cool gadgets in it.
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:35 am
by Dave
aeroglass
sparkle
windows defender
indigo
imaging and deployment
support for high pixel density displays
mstsc works properly in full screen with widescreen host displays now...
I'm sure there's more, but I don't feel like making a comprehensive list of all the changes. It might look like XP on the surface, but there are many enhancements under the covers you don't even realize are there.. plus Paul Thurrott already does a pretty good job listing all the cool things about vista in his review (easily accessible via google, btw).
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5270.asp
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:29 am
by BlueGene
I think XP was a great OS, so much better then 95/98. I have a feeling Vista will be good also, so I'll probally switch shortly after it's released.
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:32 am
by Scourge
It will be a while before I'm ready to dish out that much cash for an OS. I'll be fine with XP for some time.
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:51 am
by BlueGene
Dave wrote:aeroglass
sparkle
windows defender
indigo
imaging and deployment
support for high pixel density displays
mstsc works properly in full screen with widescreen host displays now...
I'm sure there's more, but I don't feel like making a comprehensive list of all the changes. It might look like XP on the surface, but there are many enhancements under the covers you don't even realize are there.. plus Paul Thurrott already does a pretty good job listing all the cool things about vista in his review (easily accessible via google, btw).
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5270.asp
Just read that review of the latest build, yeah I think Vista will be good. :icon14:
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 3:48 am
by ajerara
Apple does stuff like that all the time. They're in the process right now of making everyone's current comps into doorstops in about a year.