If it's not good enough for Intel, is it good enough for you? We're talking Microsoft's Windows Vista, which the chip giant's CEO, Paul Otellini, this week indicated has not won the backing of his technology experts. "I know of no organisation doing an upgrade before [Service Pack 1]," Paul Otellini told attendees of the Bank of America Technology Conference held in San Francisco this week, according to a ZDnet blog. "Intel isn't upgrading either."
Vista is "closer to the Mac than we've been on the Windows side for a long time", Otellini added. Otellini has praised the Apple operating system before, and is believed to have played a key role in persuading the Mac maker to adopt his company's processor technology.
View: The full story
News source: The Reg
Vista is "closer to the Mac than we've been on the Windows side for a long time", Otellini added. Otellini has praised the Apple operating system before, and is believed to have played a key role in persuading the Mac maker to adopt his company's processor technology.
View: The full story News source: The Reg
It's not about being slow, it's about support and stability. Companies don't like to do beta testing on their own time and using their own resources. When Vista is a proven OS, the major bugs are fixed, and there's widespread support, then many companies will start upgrading.
But many will probably skip Vista altogether since MS claims it's going to release a new OS in two years. It's going to take two years for Vista to become mainstream, right now its marketshare is less than Linux.
If MS released an amazing new OS people would want to upgrade, but they didn't. Vista is not exciting enough to be worth the hassle of early adoption. Why bother?
How is that strange or ironic?
ahh but stick with xp on the high end systems that vista uses and your have a very fast pc
You said it yourself, bad driver, what other drivers did the laptop use that aren't Vista ready yet? A simple chipset driver can kill your performence easy.
ahh but stick with xp on the high end systems that vista uses and your have a very fast pc
No it doesn't work that way. It's like how XP is faster than 2k on any of today's average computer. (including boot-up times
My Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (OCed to 2.6GHz) runs it fine, as it should, my problem is the Vista drivers for my GeForce 7900GT are pathetic...otherwise I probably would have upgraded 4 months ago...
My company is waiting to upgrade as well, for two main reasons:
1. Other than improved deployment and more security, it really doesn't offer any advantages for business users. And when you've already deployed XP, and you have a decent firewall/virus protection strategy, it really has no advantage over XP.
2. Much of the networking staff has a general distrust of anything from Microsoft. Even if Vista was perfect, they'd still wait until SP1 before they even considered using it.
My Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (OCed to 2.6GHz) runs it fine, as it should, my problem is the Vista drivers for my GeForce 7900GT are pathetic...otherwise I probably would have upgraded 4 months ago...
My company is waiting to upgrade as well, for two main reasons:
1. Other than improved deployment and more security, it really doesn't offer any advantages for business users. And when you've already deployed XP, and you have a decent firewall/virus protection strategy, it really has no advantage over XP.
2. Much of the networking staff has a general distrust of anything from Microsoft. Even if Vista was perfect, they'd still wait until SP1 before they even considered using it.
Ok take this scenario:
Machine 1:
P4 2.6Ghz w/HT
1G PC3200 Ram
80G WD 7200 rpm drive
120G Seagate 7200 rpm drive (slave)
2x Benq DVDr
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro 256MB card
GigaByte GA-8IPE1000 (Rev 1.
Ran Vista just fine. No problems.
Upgraded that machine to this:
Machine 2:
Pentium D 820 (dual core machine 2x2.8Ghz)
ASUS P5PE-VM mobo
Rest of specs identical
Runs Vista like crap.
Same Intel driver revision used, and a better power supply is used with machine #2.
Tell me how that makes any sense at all.... I went to Windows XP Pro x64 and everything is smooth as silk.
My Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (OCed to 2.6GHz) runs it fine, as it should, my problem is the Vista drivers for my GeForce 7900GT are pathetic...otherwise I probably would have upgraded 4 months ago...
My company is waiting to upgrade as well, for two main reasons:
1. Other than improved deployment and more security, it really doesn't offer any advantages for business users. And when you've already deployed XP, and you have a decent firewall/virus protection strategy, it really has no advantage over XP.
2. Much of the networking staff has a general distrust of anything from Microsoft. Even if Vista was perfect, they'd still wait until SP1 before they even considered using it.
Ok take this scenario:
Machine 1:
P4 2.6Ghz w/HT
1G PC3200 Ram
80G WD 7200 rpm drive
120G Seagate 7200 rpm drive (slave)
2x Benq DVDr
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro 256MB card
GigaByte GA-8IPE1000 (Rev 1.
Ran Vista just fine. No problems.
Upgraded that machine to this:
Machine 2:
Pentium D 820 (dual core machine 2x2.8Ghz)
ASUS P5PE-VM mobo
Rest of specs identical
Runs Vista like crap.
Same Intel driver revision used, and a better power supply is used with machine #2.
Tell me how that makes any sense at all.... I went to Windows XP Pro x64 and everything is smooth as silk.
It could just be a minor difference in Asus over GigaByte, though the chipsets are the same and the driver revision, there must be a difference somewhere.
It'll be released when the Server version is ready, all the changes/fixes they're making in longhorn server also count for Vista, same codebase. I don't think it'll be that early though, my guess would be Aug or Sept?
Too bad that has nothing to do with anything. Do you really think Microsoft sits around saying 'ok, how can we make our operating system look and feel like the one that's running 4% of computers out there?" No. As much as Apple thinks its worthy of being copied, it's not.
And besides that, Intel can get closer to Mac by switching to Mac. It's not rocket science.
Most of Intel's die-hard fans are PC users, and most smarter PC users don't like Mac. This is bad PR, stupid Intel.
The group I am talking about use PC's, and are smart enought to know what system suits them best. That's why they don't switch. If you disagree, vocalise that - don't use your mactastic emoticons.
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.