The shiny, new Windows Vista beckons, and an upgrade is mighty tempting. But before you take the plunge, be aware that you may end up forking out a lot more money than just the cost of an operating system upgrade. Here are 15 reasons to upgrade and here are 6 on why you should wait on Vista.
A lot more than just cash is on the line as well, because you may also spend plenty of time upgrading your hardware to make sure it's Vista-ready. Read on before you upgrade; being forewarned is being forearmed.
View: The full story
News source: PCWorld
A lot more than just cash is on the line as well, because you may also spend plenty of time upgrading your hardware to make sure it's Vista-ready. Read on before you upgrade; being forewarned is being forearmed.
View: The full story News source: PCWorld
Indeed, I was just thinking the same. There seem to be a lot of people who think bashing Vista is "hip".
Besides that, you must be bloody retarded to recommend people to upgrade XP rather than doing a fresh install. What a clueless moron
Indeed, I was just thinking the same. There seem to be a lot of people who think bashing Vista is "hip".
Besides that, you must be bloody retarded to recommend people to upgrade XP rather than doing a fresh install. What a clueless moron
You are aware that there is little/no performance differences between an upgrade and a clean install when it comes to Vista. Why would you do a clean install? You can upgrade and then re-install a few programs (codec packs come to mind) and you are ready to go... besides, if I account for my time, a clean install would cost a ton more.
Last edited by betasp on 12 Feb 2007 - 14:23
exactly! ... i support you.
cause clean installs are just flat out better as everythings fresh and like you said uses less disc space.
(not sure if you meant this too but..) You can 'clean install' Vista with an upgrade disc and _no_ previous OS. Install Vista, when asked for product key just click next. Once it's all installed, then _rerun_ the install from within Vista, enter your product key as normal and let it complete. Done
WTF?
/sarcasm
Can it run aero glass?
Is there any mag or site out there that does plain objective/logical/rational reviews at all? I'm tired of so called reviews from wannabe professionals who think anyone gives a **** about their personal opinions and biases and that everyone's user experience is/will be the same.
Is there any mag or site out there that does plain objective/logical/rational reviews at all? I'm tired of so called reviews from wannabe professionals who think anyone gives a **** about their personal opinions and biases and that everyone's user experience is/will be the same.
It is the inherited fault of the OS that requires customers to spend money on hardware in order to run it properly . U can run OS X tiger on 4 years old machine with absolute no effort at all and may i mention it, without upgrading your hardware. I can't run aero , but my ubuntu system has beryl that can run the affects with ease and aero is just a minor subset of the effects that beryl can produce. It's a shame that Vista wants u to buy a new graphics card. It's ok if no one else can enable those effects on your hardware but that's not simply true. Vista sucks and i can make myself think about using that crapy OS. Sure it has some nice features but basically it's worth nothing as far as i am concerned.
Is there any mag or site out there that does plain objective/logical/rational reviews at all? I'm tired of so called reviews from wannabe professionals who think anyone gives a **** about their personal opinions and biases and that everyone's user experience is/will be the same.
It is the inherited fault of the OS that requires customers to spend money on hardware in order to run it properly . U can run OS X tiger on 4 years old machine with absolute no effort at all and may i mention it, without upgrading your hardware. I can't run aero , but my ubuntu system has beryl that can run the affects with ease and aero is just a minor subset of the effects that beryl can produce. It's a shame that Vista wants u to buy a new graphics card. It's ok if no one else can enable those effects on your hardware but that's not simply true. Vista sucks and i can make myself think about using that crapy OS. Sure it has some nice features but basically it's worth nothing as far as i am concerned.
Vista (and Aero) can run pefectly fine on a 4 year old machine as long as it was reasonably high-end. Aero is also capable of a whole lot more than you see in Vista, but Vista is not designed to be overloaded with pointless swishy effects.
Besides depending on the system I'm sure many people could run Vista on 4 year old systems.
How does flip 3D improve its users' productivity again? A search bar on top of every window, and in the start bar may improve users' productivity, but not flip 3d and pointless 'fade in' 'fade out' effects applied to all windows that pop up and during login.
Last edited by Coolme on 13 Feb 2007 - 22:18
Out of all the average consumers who want to upgrade to Vista:
How many computers are there out in the wild with no DVD drive?
How many of these people really really need a 250GB drive?
How many computers have less than 512MB RAM?
How many people have an "extensive set of software"?
The average PC user uses the internet, an mp3 player, they may have a digital camera, and may want a non-webmail solution.
Vista solutions are:
Internet -> Internet Explorer (remember, average user here.)
mp3 -> Windows Media Player
Pictures - > Windows Photo Gallery (has basic tweaks such as remove redeye etc)
Email -> Windows Mail + Windows Calendar
So, so far we haven't needed to install any extra software.
They will want Office.
15 mins of installation
They may want some games - average user will have some older games.
15 mins installation
So for your average user, the only things not installed are Office and a couple of games.
Not having Aero isn't the be all and end all of this, it's only for some transparent windows after all - it doesn't really add much to the end user experience, except for looking nicer. A lot of people didn't care about Luna, and actually liked it, so I can't see that they will really care about this.
No one really needs 250GB, unless you are a hardcore torrent addict. Average users don't even have a music library on their PC of more than 5-10GB.
Most average users will be fine with 512MB RAM - Vista runs fine, I used the Beta on 512MB for a few months, and didn't notice any slowdown at all in comparison to XP.
So the conclusion is:
Casual PC Users probably aren't interested in Vista on their >4 year old hardware.
Average Users can happily update to Vista on their 3-4 year old hardware.
Hardcore Users have computers that are more than capable of using Vista anyway.
Super Elite Users don't need Vista anyway - we already have Linux, which is arguably better than Vista.
So this article is complete FUD.
Notice how I can just stick in that arguably word and thereby say almost anything while coming off as at least partially correct?
Ok, but I jest.
Correct me if I'm worng, but doesn't PC World usually play up the alternatives to Windows anyway? I haven't read that mass-market rag in quite a while.
Notice how I can just stick in that arguably word and thereby say almost anything while coming off as at least partially correct?
Ok, but I jest.
Correct me if I'm worng, but doesn't PC World usually play up the alternatives to Windows anyway? I haven't read that mass-market rag in quite a while.
me personally i dont know WHY people even bother with macs cause there far overpriced for what you get compared to a pc! thats a BIG reason why NOT to use mac's.... windows has mass ammounts of software for it be it business or average joe.... i think windows is by far the best since it's pretty much the standard... although atleast linux runs on standard pc's... mac's gotta have there own hardware thats overpriced.... thats why i dont see why people bother using mac's.... unless your super rich or something.
i never used OS X before and im sure it's solid and all but like i said above i got some pretty strong reasons not to use mac's... about only big argument in favor of mac's (atleast off the top of my head) is it's alot less likely to get infected with a virus etc (same with linu
i want to try to like linux but i just cant as windows still is the best.... linux just seems to lack software i guess compared to windows although im sure theres lots of it out there... like i say my main issue i have with linux is installing applications etc as it's pretty complicated (i still dont know howto install applications on linu
not trying to start a fight here... just stating my opinion
..how about because it's offloading all that drawing work from your CPU to your GPU? Sure as heck makes my desktop feel 'snappy' compared to XP
..how about because it's offloading all that drawing work from your CPU to your GPU? Sure as heck makes my desktop feel 'snappy' compared to XP
should have uysed windowblinds because they offload the gui to the gpu rather than the cpu if i remember right , nbot 100% sure though but the latest one im sure does the same as vista , tbh there is no point people getting vista because its just not worth it , plus with MS supposedly releasing another OS in 2009 370 for the ultimte in england is rather pricey for a snazzy new gui and a few improvements, besides i still stand by the whole thing that a new OS shouldnt require higher specs, envolution on OS should be down to the slick coding not mass amounts that require mass amounts of rescources just to run the OS ,
haha that just made my day
take a look at the priority dwm.exe has when glass is enabled; i doubt it's just on my old athlonxp 2400+ but the priority for dwm.exe is set to HIGH but once you turn glass off (even just Aero Basic) it gets dropped to Normal.
also, glass cannot be activated if dwm.exe isn't running; killed it because my mouse was skipping during Q3A but it turned out to be a mouse driver problem (or is this an OGL support issue?).
yeah, I am sure you are a big fan of windows tax, and vista's price. ($399.99 for Ultimate, 239.99 for home premium)
Most of us however, are not. http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/5450/53/
Are we reading the same article? You are talking about the article in PC World right?
me personally i dont think im gonna bother with vista for a long time (sp1 minimum) cause it dont really offer anything new to me over WinXP... XP pretty much does what everyone needs from a pc...and that is, stable os and just works
an another reason i cant see going from windows xp to vista is PRICE!... i cant justify spending like 150ish dollars for a OS thats pretty much the same as XP is overall.
So XP (NT 5.1) wasn't merely a minor update to Windows 2000 then? I mean, it's basically Windows 2000 (NT 5.0) with a 'fancy new interface', right?
You were right in saying the price is prohibitive, and right in saying XP doesn't pretty much all you need - but Vista remains a signicant advance over XP nonetheless. Whether is makes sense for you right now is the real issue - personally I don't see 'bloat' at all. People who say that usually aren't accounting for a: new functionality or b: the memory caching system on Vista (Vista sits on lots of memory _only_ until you load an app that requests it).
Or you could run the Vista Upgrade Advisor. Quick and easy. Here
Anyway say I had an Epson scanner and wanted to upgrade. I cant say what circumstances the drivers are in as you didnt say except that there were none. If drivers are comming then yes, I agree thats a perfectly good idea to wait. If epson isnt releasing drivers ever then I'd personally upgrade and never buy an epson product again. I can't stand companies that cant be stuffed supporting older hardware (with the exception of hardware that predates the dinosaurs...or is at least significantly old enough).
F U D
QFT
It's a lot cheaper than the full version and even cheaper than the upgrade, and if you don't change your hardware every day it's perfectly fine (and even if - you just need to reactivate by phone on substantial hardware changes, nothing more).
Even just looking at this logically Micrsoft couldnt prevent you reinstalling Vista in such a manner. They would already be getting lawsuits from people who can no longer use the product they purchased. Doesnt make sense so I think upgrade versions are safe as any assuming you dont want to use that XP install on another PC.
RAM is fairly cheap.
You don't need the latest and greatest video card. (Nvidia 6600 will run all the fancy bits and looking at the information valve have collected http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html it's one of the most common cards on the market.
Hard drives are cheap
Who doesn't have a DVD drive?
Then add in the fact that most households are not computer savvy and will only get vista when they buy a new PC with it pre installed.
Waste of time writing that article.
I am pretty sure consumers who got a free upgrade to vista will take advantage of it. (Mainly because their saleman used it as a sales pitch)
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.