Windows Vista Ultimate OEM


Recommended Posts

HERE is the Office 2007 prices, however I will never ever use Overcockers again after they messed me around few times on orders, so be weary of them is all I say.

Getting around OEM isn't hard for retailers. Take Newegg for example - if you don't buy anything with an OEM piece of software, they usually send it along with something like a spliced piece of wiring that you really don't have any use for, but it is hardware.

-Spenser

Problem is that you only get a 32-bit disk or a 64-bit disk. It would be nice to be able to choose between what version you wanted (and switch if nessecery)

Where's the problem? You'd have to be way past retarded to use 32bit Vista. By far the most stringent argument to switch over to Vista is 64bit, and if you take that away, there's hardly a really good reason left, so you could stay just as well with XP.

(And don't talk to me about?that?botched XP64, it's a bad joke).

Besides that, I'd rather take Vista Business Oem - much cheaper than Ultimate Oem?(only?~2/3 price) and not as much superfluent stuff.

Where's the problem? You'd have to be way past retarded to use 32bit Vista. By far the most stringent argument to switch over to Vista is 64bit, and if you take that away, there's hardly a really good reason left, so you could stay just as well with XP.

(And don't talk to me about that botched XP64, it's a bad joke).

Besides that, I'd rather take Vista Business Oem - much cheaper than Ultimate Oem (only ~2/3 price) and not as much superfluent stuff.

Are you kidding me?

64bit is still in it's infancy for normal desktop users.

Unless you are actually USING the 64bit addressing the os is actually WORSE than the 32bit version, especially when it comes to driver support and overall performance.

And you should read before you start calling people "retarded".

Are you kidding me?

64bit is still in it's infancy for normal desktop users.

Unless you are actually USING the 64bit addressing the os is actually WORSE than the 32bit version, especially when it comes to driver support and overall performance.

And you should read before you start calling people "retarded".

Before i switched to Vista Ultimate x64 i was using XP x64 and i find it to be a little snappier than the x86 flavours mainly due to the better IO performance, anybody who says it's worse clearly hasn't gave it a fair go. On the four of my PC's the only driver problem i had was with a netgear WG111T wireless USB adaptor on the kids PC and to be fair it was crap anyway so i replaced it. Also taking in to account the kernel patch guard which makes the OS more secure and more stable is enough on it's own to make me choose x64.

I'm planning on getting Ultimate or Home Premium. I wish it was 300 USD for Ultimate non-upgrade and 150 for Home Premium. I'm staying with 32bit because of compatibility of programs and drivers until both are equally equal in both. BTW, would an OEM copy of Windows work with a custom built PC?

Where's the problem? You'd have to be way past retarded to use 32bit Vista. By far the most stringent argument to switch over to Vista is 64bit, and if you take that away, there's hardly a really good reason left, so you could stay just as well with XP.

(And don't talk to me about that botched XP64, it's a bad joke).

Besides that, I'd rather take Vista Business Oem - much cheaper than Ultimate Oem (only ~2/3 price) and not as much superfluent stuff.

Wow, I have never met someone so... ignorant! 64-bit Vista may be good in time, but there's no way you can say the 32-bit version isn't more developed (driver-wise). And honestly, I don't see why people are so caught up in getting a 64-bit OS. The only REAL advantages are from having the CPU play with 64-bit numbers at a time instead of 32-bit (only useful for programs with lots of math) and addressing more than 4GB of RAM on one system.

How many enthusiasts have more than 4GB of RAM?? Heck, how many enthusiasts even HAVE 4GB of RAM? And those 64-bit programs that are everywhere? Yeah, not here buddy!

To me, driver support is much more important than having an insane amount of RAM or massive number crunching. Come back to be when that problem is solved. :whistle:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'm not unblocking my camera for this crapola. Sorry, Google.
    • Ummmm that is what is it supposed to do. Just turn if off in settings if you do not want it analyzing your open tabs. Chrome does the same thing with Gemini. Sarfari will do the samething after Apple's AI and even more so with the release of their 27 versions that is now powered by Googles LLM/ML models. Understanding why it is doing it and how it can help you vs jumping to some conspiracy theroy is a much better approach. As long as it can be turned off, all is good. Yes the default should be off but the a lot of people would never discover these features.
    • Just another reason (aside from many others) not to use Edge. Firefox 153.0b5 DEx64 has a similar feature added recently in prior builds that I will turn off at some point when I get around to it. It's the new "Something looks suspicious" page that pops up here and there. It cleverly hides itself between web pages that I've actually visited; as a result, you know, of selecting a web page and telling the browser where to go. The interesting thing is that it does not produce these warnings from pages that I, as the only intelligent user of the browser in my system, have ever directed the browser to open! What seems to be happening is that the browser looks at all the goofy ad links on a web page I do actually open and selects one that "looks suspicious" and then creates the "something looks suspicious" web page, which is neatly inserted, as mentioned, between web pages my RB ("real brain") has directed the browser to load in a session. The thing is, I usually look at links I am considering to follow before I ask the browser to load them, and in cases I have noticed where the link does indeed look suspicious, most of the time I will choose to not follow the link at all. Doesn't everyone do this or something similar? I am picky about what I voluntarily load... (I don't like links that start off fine, with a site designaiton that seems normal enough but then is followed by indecipherable alphanumeric strings many, many lines long, etc. I tend to reject those because they look suspicious. They may not be, but I don't care... I'll stay with Firefox, of course, if for no other reason than they usually let you turn off the junk you don't like. And because it isn't Edge... But at some point Microsoft will come to realize that putting your bookmarks on the left side is a Good Thing for a lot of people, just as Microsoft discovered when it had the bright idea of nailing the Windows taskbar to the bottom of the screen, when for decades Microsoft browsers had left that placement up to the user. They have finally reversed the obscenity of that decision. Finally.
    • Google was using the old CATPCHAs data to train their LLMs. What is the say they won't use this camera data of users to train their LLM? these companies need some strict regulations!
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
    • First Post
      carols23 earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      Tom Willson earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      259
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      94
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!