will sp1 for vista really make it worth switching from xp


Recommended Posts

Brandon Live
Security mechanism in Windows is joke including the one in Vista. For any serious work i use Linux, and i do programming on mainframe, in java and c++, and for entertainment, video/audio editing i use Mac OS. The only thing i use Windows for is gaming and XP is just good enough for now.

We'll just ignore the fact that I don't believe anything you just said.

I didn't say that search function is not needed for OS, but the way it's done in Vista is joke and as I said it's just an attempt to fix horrible file/folder organization in Windows which didn't change since Windows 3.11.

"It's a joke" isn't an argument. Search in Vista is awesome, and easily beats out Spotlight (which is just slowly copying features from Windows).
For example if you think that is normal to have Windows Folder visible and that you can access it in any way...then you already faily in the Security. I can take control over any file and delete it or change it or do whatever i want to it even UAC is on, which means UAC means nothings...

The things you are saying make no sense. I'm mystified at such pervasive ignorance. Yeah if you elevate you can take ownership of files if you have the take ownership privilege and the file isn't encrypted. Just like Linux. Just like the Mac. Or any other desktop OS.

Now will you please stop saying such mind-numbingly ignorant things?

Link to post
Share on other sites
rtk
If so i'm gonna get ****ed off and start deleting things in Vista like UAC...so when I install Vista there will be no **** trace about it.

Stick with win95, you're sure to love it. Or go post on a linux forum about how to make their OS less secure.

Getting alerted every time I want to launch an application is a bother to me.

Which only goes to show you're believing the mac fud rather than actually researching or testing yourself. Either that, or you're the worst system admin in existence.

I know UAC is good and all, and it's a good move for MS to put it in Vista, but just don't assume everyone will be using it, and don't expect that everyone SHOULDN'T turn it off as you suggest, everyone is free with his PC and SHOULD use it the way he wants it to be. If I'm infected by a virus because I didn't turn on the UAC then I'll only blame myself and I wont blame MS for my stupidity, simple as that.

Just try to be more flexible and understand each one needs and don't be a sales person like most of your posts in this forum IMHO.

Wrong, neither MS or any other company should continue to support insecure configurations on the assumption that the user will take the responsibility. If you're infected or compromised, you are far more likely to try and shift the blame.

If there was ever anything that should be integrated and uninstallable, it's UAC.

You've demonstrated day after day that you only spout the rhetoric BS that MS feeds you.

I think you need to look up "rhetoric", but thanks for the irony. (hint: "Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous")

Security mechanism in Windows is joke including the one in Vista. For any serious work i use Linux, and i do programming on mainframe, in java and c++, and for entertainment, video/audio editing i use Mac OS.

What's funny is that to anybody with a modicum of experience, this reads like "I use hammer to build house, rock is good, swing hammer much".

Link to post
Share on other sites
OPaul
Which only goes to show you're believing the mac fud rather than actually researching or testing yourself. Either that, or you're the worst system admin in existence.

If by research you mean running Vista, then I'd say I've done my research. I didn't know you had to be a system administrator to run Windows Vista.

Link to post
Share on other sites
»X«

This is getting insane. Nearly every thread about Vista not being all its supposed to be, ends up in a war. Brandon runs to the rescue with his usual unbiased look on things :rolleyes: , while fighting everyone on the thread and more often than not getting it locked. Just check out the above posts. Its not a debate about vista, its a debate about who can argue on the internet the best. Quoting misspelled or misused words just to get that upper hand. Sorry guys, that just makes you look like c*nts. And Brandon your the main cause. Every thread I see you post in regarding Vista ends up taking a down slide, because you refuse to let anyone slag off anything MS or let anything go at all. Its get the last word in, or be damned. People go so far out of their way to fight someone else's opinion its stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rtk
If by research you mean running Vista, then I'd say I've done my research. I didn't know you had to be a system administrator to run Windows Vista.

You are your own system administrator, as in, you administrate your system... and if you get a multitude of UAC popups, it's most likely that you've screwed up your permissions.

This is getting insane. Nearly every thread about Vista not being all its supposed to be, ends up in a war. Brandon runs to the rescue with his usual unbiased look on things :rolleyes: , while fighting everyone on the thread and more often than not getting it locked. Just check out the above posts. Its not a debate about vista, its a debate about who can argue on the internet the best. Quoting misspelled or misused words just to get that upper hand. Sorry guys, that just makes you look like c*nts. And Brandon your the main cause. Every thread I see you post in regarding Vista ends up taking a down slide, because you refuse to let anyone slag off anything MS or let anything go at all. Its get the last word in, or be damned. People go so far out of their way to fight someone else's opinion its stupid.

Opinions are like a$$holes, everyone's got one. When someone voices that opinion as a truth, they'd better be able to back it up with more than "vista is stupid." or they beg to be admonished as a fud spreading anti-ms fanboy.

Brandon isn't the cause, although he is central to many of these debates. I'd guess this is because he's knowledgeable and available, and an easy target. If you read the thread, you'll see that there's a few hardcore trolls who are always around to try and turn the topic into a "bill gates sucks, so does vista) thread.

Once freak_power has a better argument than "Vista is stupid", he'll get a bit more respect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rajputwarrior
"It's a joke" isn't an argument. Search in Vista is awesome, and easily beats out Spotlight (which is just slowly copying features from Windows).

from my experience spotlight beats vistas desktop search. For instance i added 5 files to my documents, and it toke vista a fw seconds to index them, maybe only a couple, and that is reasonable. Spotlight was instant, and not to mention also takes liess cpu whn search, some about 75 percent of the time in my experience brings out the exact result i am looking for. It's kinda like spotlight is google and vista search is msn live, ask anybody and they will say google is better. Search is in Vista is good, but not as good as Spotlight(and what features is it copying?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen
This is getting insane. Nearly every thread about Vista not being all its supposed to be, ends up in a war. Brandon runs to the rescue with his usual unbiased look on things :rolleyes: , while fighting everyone on the thread and more often than not getting it locked. Just check out the above posts. Its not a debate about vista, its a debate about who can argue on the internet the best. Quoting misspelled or misused words just to get that upper hand. Sorry guys, that just makes you look like c*nts. And Brandon your the main cause. Every thread I see you post in regarding Vista ends up taking a down slide, because you refuse to let anyone slag off anything MS or let anything go at all. Its get the last word in, or be damned. People go so far out of their way to fight someone else's opinion its stupid.
Yes, Brandon is biased. On the other side, I am rather biased toward "open source". He and I have different fundamental viewpoints on a number of topics, and have agreed on some other basic principles. Although he may be a bit tenacious and vigorous in his defense of Microsoft and their products, I have found him to be rational in dicsussion.

If someone is correcting misunderstandings about a product or feature, I see no reason to complain. Brandon is an alright guy (even if he doesn't read his Microsoft EULAs and admits that he would need a lawyer to do so) ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Geoffrey B.

its worth the switch now i have it on all my machines now except my server.

Link to post
Share on other sites
raskren
from my experience spotlight beats vistas desktop search. For instance i added 5 files to my documents, and it toke vista a fw seconds to index them, maybe only a couple, and that is reasonable. Spotlight was instant, and not to mention also takes liess cpu whn search, some about 75 percent of the time in my experience brings out the exact result i am looking for. It's kinda like spotlight is google and vista search is msn live, ask anybody and they will say google is better. Search is in Vista is good, but not as good as Spotlight(and what features is it copying?)

I find the opposite to be true. It is easier to activate the search feature (one key!) and more relevant search results are delivered faster than Spotlight. Type into the Start menu, wait a single second and *all* your search results are there. Spotlight's routine is type into the Spotlight field and wait for result one, wait for result two, wait for result three, etc.

Can you type "email from Frank about cats yesterday" into Spotlight? How about "documents from Tom about EGC"?

Nah, I didn't think so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rajputwarrior
I find the opposite to be true. It is easier to activate the search feature (one key!) and more relevant search results are delivered faster than Spotlight. Type into the Start menu, wait a single second and *all* your search results are there. Spotlight's routine is type into the Spotlight field and wait for result one, wait for result two, wait for result three, etc.

Can you type "email from Frank about cats yesterday" into Spotlight? How about "documents from Tom about EGC"?

Nah, I didn't think so.

that may be true, but spotlight accuracy is just ridiculous. I type in an entire sentence from any type of text document and boom it'll find it, instantly. I also enjoy how the indexing takes hardly any cpu and it ridiculousl quick. Though i do agree one key does make it easier, i find the integration is a lot better with Tiger and will only get better with Leopard. Also, you don't have to "wait." If you referring to literally milliseconds, sometimes not even, it's up there in no time at all, then you are one impatient person who really values every split second in his life. Yes i am running a core 2, but it was the same when i had my ibook g4.

Also complaining about as it finds things asyou type, i don't see that as something negative, as spotlight learns your habits and brings up what you use the most that have those letters in that query.

But maybe it's just difference of opinion, but what you do say is not false, i will admit i need more time with vista search, but so far i am learning towards spotlight does a better job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
freak_power

What I'm talking here is a different concept of OS, and different file/folder organization.

Example:

Every time you save your music file, or document or video file you get a popup window and you can pick the location where to save it. Well, Windows is stupid enough to let you save your mp3 file under let's say System 32 folder. Why? Because it's horrible.

What Windows should do is when you click save button to automatically save file in centralized location which is itself in separate partition from the one where system files resides. That separate location has main file cabinet which is divided into other cabinets by file type and each of them separated by cabinets holding same extension type etc... And this is deault setup by Windows.

As I said this centralized location resides on different partition and only system files are on the primary which you can't view it or access it, and why would you?

Now Games should be automatically installed on the third partitions, where game saves on fourth, apps on the fifths. In addition to this Windows should not use registry, so let's say you decide to remove your Windows and install it again. Well, the process would affect only first partition where are the drivers and other system files you install, and new windows copy scans other partitions creates shortcuts and you can use your apps, games etc without installing it again.

Having all files organized like this search app would exactly know what to search and where for by giving name with or without extension, time when it's created etc... Just to mention that each file cabinet which hold extension type under file type cabinet is also divided into cabinets by alphabet, and then going further by date etc..

Basically Search doesn't need to search whole freaking hard drive till finds what are you looking for but the location itself is pretty much nailed down before it even starts. And then of course you don't need any indexing or any crap like that...

Main file cabinet is dynamic and you can reorganize by attributes or remove or add custom made attributes as you wish. Also all the partitions are dynamic, except for main partition which is fixed and it can't be resized. Let's say your partition where your games are installed is running out of space, windows calculates the size of other partitions and dynamically reorganizes your hard drives. Now, when you hit a limit in all partitions of course you get warning...

Edited by freak_power
Link to post
Share on other sites
Phemo
Every time you save your music file, or document or video file you get a popup window and you can pick the location where to save it. Well, Windows is stupid enough to let you save your mp3 file under let's say System 32 folder. Why? Because it's horrible.

What Windows should do is when you click save button to automatically save file in centralized location which is itself in separate partition from the one where system files resides. That separate location has main file cabinet which is divided into other cabinets by file type and each of them separated by cabinets holding same extension type etc... And this is deault setup by Windows.

As I said this centralized location resides on different partition and only system files are on the primary which you can't view it or access it, and why would you?

Now Games should be automatically installed on the third partitions, where game saves on fourth, apps on the fifths. In addition to this Windows should not use registry, so let's say you decide to remove your Windows and install it again. Well, the process would affect only first partition where are the drivers and other system files you install, and new windows copy scans other partitions creates shortcuts and you can use your apps, games etc without installing it again.

Crappy idea - how would you deal with multiple hard drives? How would you manage your space? What if your so-called pre-defined games partition has tons of free space while your applications partition has none?

In other words, what you're saying could work but you'd need full control over it - something that's too much for most users. Besides, you can do that right now with XP if you wanted, so in short what I'm saying is that it over-complicates the matter for most users and in fact makes things more difficult with regards to space management. I sort of see what you're saying - maybe use containers on one drive which you can allocate as much space to as you like, on-the-fly but that's too complicated for most users.

I'm not a Vista supporter by any means but it does do a lot of things right. Your thoughts could work with a little effort, but it'd still be too much for the majority of users. Remember, a hell of a lot of people who use Windows don't actually care about games, music, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
S550
What I'm talking here is a different concept of OS, and different file/folder organization.

Example:

Every time you save your music file, or document or video file you get a popup window and you can pick the location where to save it. Well, Windows is stupid enough to let you save your mp3 file under let's say System 32 folder. Why? Because it's horrible.

No it assumes that you have a reason for wanting it there, what if you run across a time when you DO want an MP3 ther for some reason and Windows wont let you....then you would still call it horrible.

What Windows should do is when you click save button to automatically save file in centralized location which is itself in separate partition from the one where system files resides. That separate location has main file cabinet which is divided into other cabinets by file type and each of them separated by cabinets holding same extension type etc... And this is deault setup by Windows.

As I said this centralized location resides on different partition and only system files are on the primary which you can't view it or access it, and why would you?

Wow i don't even know where to start with how ****ty that is. Oh..yes I do. If you have ever worked in a media company? having files all in different folders by "type" really ****s up finding related files. Also forcing the use of different partitions forces the OS to know EXACTLY how much space it will need before you can install it, decide to add more programs later and then the partition is full and you need to do a FULL reinstall of the system, never mind that you have another 12gb on the "storage' partition.

Why would you access it? gee maybe to change config files or replace some files(like the uxtheme hack)

Now Games should be automatically installed on the third partitions, where game saves on fourth, apps on the fifths. In addition to this Windows should not use registry, so let's say you decide to remove your Windows and install it again. Well, the process would affect only first partition where are the drivers and other system files you install, and new windows copy scans other partitions creates shortcuts and you can use your apps, games etc without installing it again.

Again some how you think the OS will know EXACTLY how big to make those partitions

Also all the partitions are dynamic, except for main partition which is fixed and it can't be resized. Let's say your partition where your games are installed is running out of space, windows calculates the size of other partitions and dynamically reorganizes your hard drives. Now, when you hit a limit in all partitions of course you get warning...

I'm not even going to start on all the stuff thats wrong with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
raskren
What I'm talking here is a different concept of OS, and different file/folder organization.

Example:

Every time you save your music file, or document or video file you get a popup window and you can pick the location where to save it. Well, Windows is stupid enough to let you save your mp3 file under let's say System 32 folder. Why? Because it's horrible.

What Windows should do is when you click save button to automatically save file in centralized location which is itself in separate partition from the one where system files resides. That separate location has main file cabinet which is divided into other cabinets by file type and each of them separated by cabinets holding same extension type etc... And this is deault setup by Windows.

As I said this centralized location resides on different partition and only system files are on the primary which you can't view it or access it, and why would you?

Now Games should be automatically installed on the third partitions, where game saves on fourth, apps on the fifths. In addition to this Windows should not use registry, so let's say you decide to remove your Windows and install it again. Well, the process would affect only first partition where are the drivers and other system files you install, and new windows copy scans other partitions creates shortcuts and you can use your apps, games etc without installing it again.

Having all files organized like this search app would exactly know what to search and where for by giving name with or without extension, time when it's created etc... Just to mention that each file cabinet which hold extension type under file type cabinet is also divided into cabinets by alphabet, and then going further by date etc..

Basically Search doesn't need to search whole freaking hard drive till finds what are you looking for but the location itself is pretty much nailed down before it even starts. And then of course you don't need any indexing or any crap like that...

Main file cabinet is dynamic and you can reorganize by attributes or remove or add custom made attributes as you wish. Also all the partitions are dynamic, except for main partition which is fixed and it can't be resized. Let's say your partition where your games are installed is running out of space, windows calculates the size of other partitions and dynamically reorganizes your hard drives. Now, when you hit a limit in all partitions of course you get warning...

How does this benefit the end user? Oh, it doesn't. No other operating system available today behaves in this ridiculous manner so why do you target your little geek frustrations at Windows? In Linux I can save a file anywhere I want, same with Mac OS, same with UNIX. Segregating file types to different "partitions" no better than segregating them into folders.

Search as it exists in Windows Vista doesn't search the entire hard drive. It searches an index which is a collection of metadata derived from files.

This is your worst post....ever. You should probably stop posting about the "shortcomings" of Windows Vista because your latest garbage is just the nail in the proverbial "I-Don't-Have-A-Clue-Coffin."

Link to post
Share on other sites
OPaul
In Linux I can save a file anywhere I want, same with Mac OS, same with UNIX.

Not unless you have root access you can't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
micro

Will posting a reply to this thread really make you change your mind?

because it sounds like you made up your mind already.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon Live
What I'm talking here is a different concept of OS, and different file/folder organization.

Example:

Every time you save your music file, or document or video file you get a popup window and you can pick the location where to save it. Well, Windows is stupid enough to let you save your mp3 file under let's say System 32 folder. Why? Because it's horrible.

When you save a music file, most apps will default to your "Music" folder. You're suggesting that Windows not allow you to specify any location you want to save a file? That's absurd. What if I were downloading a new system start-up sound?

Regular user accounts can't save anything into %windir% - and admins have to elevate to do so. I really don't see what the problem is.

What Windows should do is when you click save button to automatically save file in centralized location which is itself in separate partition from the one where system files resides. That separate location has main file cabinet which is divided into other cabinets by file type and each of them separated by cabinets holding same extension type etc... And this is deault setup by Windows.

As I said this centralized location resides on different partition and only system files are on the primary which you can't view it or access it, and why would you?

Automatically saving doesn't work. What if the file name is wrong? What if you want to correct it to match your naming scheme, or add tags appropriate to your organizational system? For the most part people shouldn't have to worry about what folder something is downloaded to, but lots of people are used to being able to do that, so it's hard to take that functionality away completely. Some people will always want it.

I can't possibly imagine why you would want a "different partition" - what you're describing are folders. You have a differen folder for Windows, not partition. If you're a more advanced user that's certainly an option, I just can't imagine why anybody would want that. You also seem to be suggesting that files be stored in "cabinets" (folders?) by extension. Why? What's the point of an extension then? Plus, why would you impose a fixed hiearchy when there's no reason to?

No, the system we have now is already far better than what you described.

Having all files organized like this search app would exactly know what to search and where for by giving name with or without extension, time when it's created etc... Just to mention that each file cabinet which hold extension type under file type cabinet is also divided into cabinets by alphabet, and then going further by date etc..

We already have that. When you search for a specific extension, date, etc - only the index for those properties is searched. There's no reason for it to be hierarchical - we already have a far more flexible system.

Basically Search doesn't need to search whole freaking hard drive till finds what are you looking for but the location itself is pretty much nailed down before it even starts.
You're describing the index. You can query for all results of a certain type, or all results from a certain date, etc - and it will only search those fields. If you query for "Email from john" (which is really something like Select columns From SystemIndex Where System.Kind == Email AND Contains('System.FromName', "john")) it isn't going to look at the author property of every item in your index, and it certainly isn't going to "search your entire hard drive." It's a complicated process, but essentially it's going to grab the list of Emails and the list of items from John and return results that are in both.
And then of course you don't need any indexing or any crap like that...

You will always need indexing. Grepping over a folder structure and parsing out properties on-demand then sorting or filtering them in memory is always going to be incredibly slow and often impossible. The right answer is to have a database with all of that meta data stored in it and indexed. Plus you aren't limitted to files. Items in the index / database can be anything, like e-mail in Outlook or Thunderbird, for example.

Main file cabinet is dynamic and you can reorganize by attributes or remove or add custom made attributes as you wish. Also all the partitions are dynamic, except for main partition which is fixed and it can't be resized. Let's say your partition where your games are installed is running out of space, windows calculates the size of other partitions and dynamically reorganizes your hard drives. Now, when you hit a limit in all partitions of course you get warning...

Developers can add custom properties to the index, and giving the user more power will come in future releases.

And what do you like so much about partitions versus folders and having partitions with fixed sizes? It's like you're asking to go back in time to the 80s or something.

Automatically and transparently working with additional hard drive space is definitely something that Windows (and other OSes) could improve upon. Home Server does that, so I wouldn't be surprised to see other OSes supporting that in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.