Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Microsoft New Operating System in 3 years

Vista is SLOW and CRAP ... this is what a friend of mine say's and he's 100% Microsoft and swears he would never use a Mac .. :mad:

I asked him "If it's that slow and that bad doesn't it make sense to change to something fast and beautiful .... like a Mac?" ..... He didn't reply.
 
Father Jack said:
Vista is SLOW and CRAP ... this is what a friend of mine say's and he's 100% Microsoft and swears he would never use a Mac .. :mad:

I asked him "If it's that slow and that bad doesn't it make sense to change to something fast and beautiful .... like a Mac?" ..... He didn't reply.
Click to expand...


well for vista being slow compared to XP lets remember that XP was made in 2001. I bet Tiger would be slow on a comptuer compared to one now running OS9 simplely because 0s9 is a much smaller OS and does not tax the system as much as OSX.

XP is old. Vista biggest problem is the age between XP and vista really mess up a lot of people. It used to be if you got a computer with a previous version of windows on it then it work get with the next one (might not work so well if you try to go to the one following that) vista is replacing an OS that should of had a new version in 2004. it does tax 2004 system heavily but 2004 system general exceeded the recommended specs at least.

From what I was reading Vista is a stepping stone OS. It became the brigde between XP and the replacement to it. kind of like ME (load of crap OS) was the stepping stone bridging windows 98 and XP.

I think this one if it follows the way XP was then the one following vista would be a pretty nice. XP was a lot nicer than windows 98se. So the following to vista could easily be as nice of a jump.

Now the question will be will M$ be able to pull it off in 3 years.
 
andrewheard said:
I was under the impression that it only kept a backup of system files.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I'm not entirely sure on the details. But after a system restore once I lost some of my documents and .exe's.

I don't trust it because of that. Haven't used it since!

Time Machine seems to be the only program that lets you actively retrieve backup documents and the likes. Which is what I'm really after in a backup suite.
 
siurpeeman said:
is anyone really calling vista a failure? give it time, people will have no choice but to upgrade to vista.
Click to expand...

They have a choice. Can I remind you which board you have been posting on? So if someone is using Windows XP or an older Windows version, and doesn't want to switch to Vista (I hesitate to call it an "upgrade"), what possible alternatives could you recommend?
 
Rodimus Prime said:
well for vista being slow compared to XP lets remember that XP was made in 2001. I bet Tiger would be slow on a comptuer compared to one now running OS9 simplely because 0s9 is a much smaller OS and does not tax the system as much as OSX.
Click to expand...

You can't compare Tiger and MacOS 9. Compare Tiger with Panther: It runs faster. Compare Panther with 10.2: It runs faster. Compare 10.2 with 10.1: It runs faster. Compare 10.1 with 10.0 (scary): It runs faster. Every MacOS X version has been faster than the previous one.

And if MacOS 9 had been ported to Intel processors, it would have been much slower because MacOS X makes much more use of dual or quad processors.
 
Maybe Windows 2010 will have small applications that serve a specific purpose, like a weather report, or a language translator, or a Yellow Pages look up, or calendar. The possibilities are endless. Microsoft could call them Desk Accessories.
 
Rodimus Prime said:
well for vista being slow compared to XP lets remember that XP was made in 2001. I bet Tiger would be slow on a comptuer compared to one now running OS9 simplely because 0s9 is a much smaller OS and does not tax the system as much as OSX.

XP is old. Vista biggest problem is the age.... blah blah blah blah
....vista could easily be as nice of a jump.

Now the question will be will M$ be able to pull it off in 3 years.
Click to expand...

Windows XP was released the same date as Mac OS 10.0, which is MILES slower than Tiger. 10.0 < 10.1 < 10.2 < 10.3 < 10.4 < 10.5

My 350 MHz G3 iMac is faster than ever running on Tiger.
 
Well, say what you want, but Vista is better than XP from the technology/stability/usability point of view. Of course, things like activation, HW requirements and some other artificial restrictions are ridiculous but still, I like it more than XP.

BTW, IMO Vista is, technology-wise, somewhere between Panther and Tiger. So 2010 release will probably be something like Leopard ;)
 
To be honest, I can't find fault with Vista. I quite like it. Looking forward to updating my MBP in a few years and running the OS after Leopard and MS on one computer :D
 
Abstract said:
Is "Cha-ching" considered a business forecast?
Click to expand...

Aren't Apple and M$ both businesses with visions? They are both in the business to make money, just by different routes. Apple has made theirs by innovating the OS and creating a great niche product type along with crazy marketing, Microsoft has done it by massively saturating the market. If the roles had switched and Microsoft was behind from the beginning, I'm sure we'd all be singing a different tune.

Either way I think that a new OS for Microsoft sooner rather than later is a good thing. When there's competition, it's always good for the consumer. I think Vista is fine, works ok for me on my Windows box, no problems, faster than XP but then again the comp. I'm using is powerful in comparison to others.

Hopefully Microsoft and Apple will start to diverge in their OS offerings and the look b/c frankly I'm sick of both sides saying M$ copied Apple! and Apple copied M$! . Their offerings are just where the market is going and what consumers are wanting, blatantly copying I doubt it.
 
walangij said:
I think Vista is fine, works ok for me on my Windows box, no problems, faster than XP but then again the comp. I'm using is powerful in comparison to others.
Click to expand...

So are you actually saying that Vista is faster than XP on the same machine? That's not my experience, though Vista isn't considerably slower.

I agree that OS X and Windows are fairly similar in design though but making it different is certainly disadvantageous to Apple as it makes switching more difficult.

If MS get a new OS in 3 years I doubt it'll be a big improvement over Vista.
 
walangij said:
...frankly I'm sick of both sides saying M$ copied Apple! and Apple copied M$! . Their offerings are just where the market is going and what consumers are wanting, blatantly copying I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Apparently David Pogue shares your opinion. ;)

gnasher729 said:
They have a choice. Can I remind you which board you have been posting on? So if someone is using Windows XP or an older Windows version, and doesn't want to switch to Vista (I hesitate to call it an "upgrade"), what possible alternatives could you recommend?
Click to expand...
Hmm, let me think.

Uh...

Damn...it's on the tip of my tongue.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back