Closing the Door to Microsoft Vista


Recommended Posts

I can't think of many good reasons for companies to rush out, and install the lastest version of any OS - stability should be key, and XP is proven; not things like transparent Menu bars or Tasktray/Aero. Also, Vista does seem to pretty much require 2GB+ and a dual-core for good performance, and I doubt most office machines will meet that.

A lot of companies I've worked with, skipped 2k, and went from NT4 to XP, I don't find it that uncommon, so I'm not surprised GM would do this.

Same old boring storey.

People said the same thing when XP came out, XP was hated. Now that it is a mature operating system, people are loving it.

The same thing will happen to Vista, it will mature after 2 or 3 service packs.

They will not exactly migrate to Windows 7 as soon as it comes out,. It will be buggy like any new operating system to start off with. At this point they will go over to Vista.

Same old boring storey.

People said the same thing when XP came out, XP was hated. Now that it is a mature operating system, people are loving it.

The same thing will happen to Vista, it will mature after 2 or 3 service packs.

They will not exactly migrate to Windows 7 as soon as it comes out,. It will be buggy like any new operating system to start off with. At this point they will go over to Vista.

A well used speech but this time it is not true, the majority of computers today though struggle on Vista, and alot of them suffer from terrible driver support still in some areas, also Vista GUI is very different to XP, coupled with others niggles and admittedly poor shockingly poor optimized core which seems to lag down for no reason at times equals an operating system which more to work out of itself than XP ever had to.

am i the only person that likes vista because i find that on my low end laptop runs vista fine

Stats:

Acer Aspire 5100

Amd Turion 64 @ 2.00Ghz

Crucial Ram : 2x 1Gb @ 667 Mhz

Vista Ultimate SP1 32Bit

I've got a laptop WAY worse than what you think is low end, lol and Vista works fine. I love it and can't figure out why people don't like it to be honest.

It's bogged down for techies, like most of the people on Neowin. But it's a great OS for a family or even a small company.

I bet you Toyota and Handa have Vista on their machines :p

I bet you they have Windows 2000 on their machines :p

It's business, and those companies won't upgrade as long as the system is still working fine for them. Plenty of people in my company are still running Pentium III with 256M RAM, and it's supposed to be an IT company. :laugh:

am i the only person that likes vista because i find that on my low end laptop runs vista fine

Stats:

Acer Aspire 5100

Amd Turion 64 @ 2.00Ghz

Crucial Ram : 2x 1Gb @ 667 Mhz

Vista Ultimate SP1 32Bit

you call that low end? my Thinkpad T43 with 1G RAM is actually one of the "higher-end" notebooks in my company, the guy next to me is using a T41 with 512M RAM.

well, Vista did install and run on my T43, but it's definitely not running well...

I've got a laptop WAY worse than what you think is low end, lol and Vista works fine. I love it and can't figure out why people don't like it to be honest.

It's bogged down for techies, like most of the people on Neowin. But it's a great OS for a family or even a small company.

yep. a laptop with 2 x 1 gb is hardly low end! :)

am i the only person that likes vista because i find that on my low end laptop runs vista fine

Stats:

Acer Aspire 5100

Amd Turion 64 @ 2.00Ghz

Crucial Ram : 2x 1Gb @ 667 Mhz

Vista Ultimate SP1 32Bit

Thats an unusual definition of low-end. My computers must be crap then...

2Gb sounds like a lot these days, but have you actually priced laptops lately? Prices of RAM, especially laptop RAM, has went down a lot, 2Gb is about the average you get, with a lot of the mainstream priced lappys giving you 4Gb.

I still agree his laptop is hardly "low end" but it's not that far off considering what your money gets you today.

They are NOT failing to upgrade because (waaaaaah wah wah) Vi$ta Fails..!11oneone <insert current forum trend word here>. They just aren't upgrading because at this moment in time, financially and practically, to upgrade would be pointless.

:cool:

The automaker has encountered so many speed bumps getting Vista to work on its machines that it may just wait for the next version of Windows
Vista taxes all but the most modern PCs with hefty processing and memory requirements. Many of GM's PCs can't even run the system.
Then there are compatibility problems with all the software that needs to run on Windows. GM's software vendors still haven't ensured all their programs will run on Vista trouble-free.

From these quotes it looks like GM isn't upgrading because vista fails and not all of their software will run on it.

Sure, GM might have a bad IT department, I could not comment on that any further because I do not know that to be a fact. What I can say though is that in the medical field, many medical records and practice/patient management software systems are not Vista-ready at this point in time, and from various vendors I am being informed that their software will not be ready for Vista before Windows 7 is scheduled to be released at this particular time.

From an economical standpoint, I can definitely see why the automobile industry might not want to upgrade to Vista these days. Whether Vista is working for them to run the software they need or not ... currently it is just not looking to well for finance-intensive upgrades in that market.

Just my 2 cents ...

Same old boring storey.

People said the same thing when XP came out, XP was hated. Now that it is a mature operating system, people are loving it.

The same thing will happen to Vista, it will mature after 2 or 3 service packs.

They will not exactly migrate to Windows 7 as soon as it comes out,. It will be buggy like any new operating system to start off with. At this point they will go over to Vista.

Well said. However, people hated XP SP0 and really liked sp1, that isn't case with Vista Sp1. Maybe sp2 or sp3 will bring something worth to upgrade.

Hold on there, he has a point. It can still be a failure, even if the software works well. Amiga OS worked really, really well, however it too was an epic failure.

Content may be king, but adoption rates pay the king's salary. And in that way, Vista is failing.

-Ax

Um, NO. Look up the adoption figures and you'll realise that actually its doing extremely well. All this talk of low sales is truthfully just FUD.

Vista is Microsoft's epic fail.

Not an *epic fail*; however, it IS a fail compared to the usual upgrade path.

However, two of the reason why it's a fail aren't anything it had control over.

1. The tanking economy. Business purchasing (especially new IT hardware) is down, and down large. There is close to no hardware turnover, and most businesses won't upgrade operating systems on old hardware.

2. Laggard third-party developers, especially in line-of-business applications. Development of client-side software that is Vista-ready for line-of-business applications has also lagged (partly due to reason #1, the tanking economy, and partly due to other issues taking precedent at some of these concerns, such as the BEA/Oracle dance). If your major application isn't ready, the odds are high you won't move. (In late 2000, Comcast saw its own companywide migration to Windows 2000 Professional from NT 4 held up because a single major line-of-business application wasn't ready for Windows 2000 Professional, despite the OS itself having shipped over a year previous; this actually held up the migration for four months.)

Let's be realistic, here; system prices overall are down (and performance for price is up) starting a year prior to Vista's launch, and the trend has continued since. A quad-core system that was over $2,000US (quantity one) a mere eighteen months ago is under $1000US (still quantity one) today, and that includes the top-end version of Vista (Ultimate x64 no less). Those aren't sale prices; those are, in fact, everyday prices at a major big-box retailer (business pays even less due to bulk-buying). Now, Vista is big; much bigger than Windows XP (in terms of sheer code size). However, despite the sheer volume of code, the typical new system of today handles all that weight easily, with room to spare. (A good reason for this is that you have fewer sub-equipped desktops being sold to business today; as opposed to desktops with 512 and 256 MB of RAM, 1 GB is the new standard loadout for a corporate desktop). Upgrading all those older desktops to handle Vista takes tons of time and serious money; it's too easy simply to replace the systems, as opposed to upgrading them. (The two most critical upgrades are going to be system memory and hard drive space, with memory being the most important. Memory pricing, however, has taken a strange turn, with DDR2 being cheaper than the older DDR memory the older systems need. Throw that price paradigm over several hundred PCs, and the thinking becomes replace, not upgrade, quickly.)

2Gb sounds like a lot these days, but have you actually priced laptops lately? Prices of RAM, especially laptop RAM, has went down a lot, 2Gb is about the average you get, with a lot of the mainstream priced lappys giving you 4Gb.

I still agree his laptop is hardly "low end" but it's not that far off considering what your money gets you today.

Laptops, notebooks, and desktops all are including out-sized RAM loadouts these days. In fact, let's look at the $1000US retail desktop at the big-box retailers: 3 GB of RAM is the overwhelming standard, and those that don't have 3 GB have 4 GB instead. The CPU? No Celerons (even dual-core Celerons) here; in fact, very few dual-core CPUs, for that matter. The standard at this price-point is quad-core (and Intel quad-core, at that). In short, the standard is the King of Processor Overkill. Businesses aren't paying $1000US for these dasktops; they are paying less (usually quite a bit less); however, they won't buy them if they don't have the money to buy or their critical applications aren't ready (and all too often it's both).

I do work at a GM dealership. The accounting/inventory software we have to use looks like something from the 80's with a modern frontend on it. In fact I use the "'80's" desktop instead of the new one because it is much faster. This software is not Vista compatible so we have to stick to XP. Because it is web-based, we cannot even update certain things like Java and such because it will break the program. Everybody hates it and we still have 3 years left on our contract.

The SysAdmin would love to go to Vista. He would set up everyone as a standard user which would eliminate a lot of headaches he has to deal with (such as malware).

That's pretty commonplace. Also, consider telecommuters. (More and more of those these days, with the higher cost of fuel.) They are using VPN software to connect back to the *home office*, and all too much of it isn't ready for Vista, either (that is indeed the issue with Cisco's VPN software and the client-side app for PeopleSoft/HR). You won't upgrade if your major applications aren't ready.

The company is basically held hostage by their software.

Yes, this is the real reason why Vista isn't an upgrade option. It's not a fault of the OS, it's a fault of the company's own software and more often than not, it's better just sticking with it.

It may suck, but it works and that's all that matters. Upgrading it costs time and money, plus will invariably cause problems as staff are retrained and bugs are found. I mean, how often have you heard about a company having serious problems because of rolling out a new software upgrade?

Yes, this is the real reason why Vista isn't an upgrade option. It's not a fault of the OS, it's a fault of the company's own software and more often than not, it's better just sticking with it.

It depends, for Microsoft, maybe the company's own software incompatible to Vista is at fault. But for the company, a software that served it well for years (and is continuing to do so for the forseeable future) is definitely not at fault.

If you ask me, it's the fault of Capitalism :p

2Gb sounds like a lot these days, but have you actually priced laptops lately? Prices of RAM, especially laptop RAM, has went down a lot, 2Gb is about the average you get, with a lot of the mainstream priced lappys giving you 4Gb.

I still agree his laptop is hardly "low end" but it's not that far off considering what your money gets you today.

I wonder what you consider as "mainstream" price? IMHO, "mainstream" price should be at least less than US$1000. Also 4GB RAM is the TOP of current line of laptops, I don't know any laptop with 6G or 8G RAM, not even those monstrous DTRs :huh:

Well said. However, people hated XP SP0 and really liked sp1, that isn't case with Vista Sp1. Maybe sp2 or sp3 will bring something worth to upgrade.

well, apparently people hated XP SP0 less than Vista SP0, that's why XP had a much higher adoption rate than Vista after the same time of release.

Um, NO. Look up the adoption figures and you'll realise that actually its doing extremely well. All this talk of low sales is truthfully just FUD.

Umm, maybe you should look up the adoption figures yourself. XP had an adoption rate of 36% after its first year, while Vista has an adoption rate of 14% after its first year. I don't think that looks anywhere near "doing extremely well".

Sure, GM might have a bad IT department, I could not comment on that any further because I do not know that to be a fact. What I can say though is that in the medical field, many medical records and practice/patient management software systems are not Vista-ready at this point in time, and from various vendors I am being informed that their software will not be ready for Vista before Windows 7 is scheduled to be released at this particular time.

From an economical standpoint, I can definitely see why the automobile industry might not want to upgrade to Vista these days. Whether Vista is working for them to run the software they need or not ... currently it is just not looking to well for finance-intensive upgrades in that market.

Just my 2 cents ...

Indeed. AFAIK, the only companies that provide their employee with somewhat up-to-date computers are those computer manufacturers like HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc. All other companies just try to make use of their existing hardware and software as much as possible.

But then, I have just been to Microsoft's regional headquarters here last week for a project, and they are using AthlonX2 4200+ with 1G RAM and integrated graphics chip, AND running Windows XP. I guess if a lot of the Microsoft guys themselves are still not upgraded to Vista after one and a half years of its release, it's kinda hard for them to convince anyone else to the upgrade... :laugh:

I wonder what you consider as "mainstream" price? IMHO, "mainstream" price should be at least less than US$1000. Also 4GB RAM is the TOP of current line of laptops, I don't know any laptop with 6G or 8G RAM, not even those monstrous DTRs :huh:
Quotes for 1GB DRAM modules have fallen to US$16 in the second half of December while prices for two 2GB modules are likely to drop to less than US$60 in the first quarter of 2008. Based on this scenario, the cost for 4GB RAM will account for less than 6% of a US$1,000-cost notebook. This is much lower than the 10% of the overall system cost as seen in the past, memory makers added.

Source: http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20071220PD212.html

Do the math, if they spend 10% of the laptop's cost on RAM, then 2Gb works out at about $32. Say $40 just for argument's sake, that still falls nicely in line with a $400 laptop.

Source: http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20071220PD212.html

Do the math, if they spend 10% of the laptop's cost on RAM, then 2Gb works out at about $32. Say $40 just for argument's sake, that still falls nicely in line with a $400 laptop.

LOL, then please find a $400 laptop with 4G RAM for me, I'll pay you $800 for it.

By your "math", there should be 8G RAM laptops at $1000. Obviously your "math" is way off of reality.

I don't care about your "math", I only care about FACTS, and these are FACTS :

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping...=V6700TX_series

http://www.gateway.com/systems/product/529668032.php

heck, the CHEAPEST laptop I can find around here is $400 with 512M RAM, and that's from some cheapo Chinese brand called Hasee.

with a lot of the mainstream priced lappys giving you 4Gb.

I thought you were talking about real-world laptop markets, guess I was wrong, since obviously you were talking about some non-existent $400 laptop with 4GB RAM out of your "math" hallucination. :rolleyes:

In reality, there is no "if" or "math", there's only hard facts. The cheapest laptop with 4GB RAM AFAIK is priced at around $1200 from some cheapo Chinese brand, and that is still quite above "mainstream price".

Edited by wellofsouls

Uhh...did you even read what I said? I said 2Gb for a $400 laptop isn't inconceivable, not 4Gb. Show me where I said 4Gb, please.

And there's a very good reason you don't see many laptops with 6 or 8Gb of RAM - the bloody OS can't support it! Sure, you can get 64bit OS's, but why bother dealing with all the potential technical problems of incompatibilities with software and drivers when you can just give the customer a 32bit OS and spend the money on a built-in webcam or better graphics card or, better yet, profit?

I just had a look on Dell's website and the first laptop I seen was priced at $500 and had 2Gb of RAM, so I'm not exactly far off, am I?

Look harder next time. And pay more attention, too.

I feel the need to remind people that they're forgetting that windows 7 will be a MINOR upgrade to windows vista....... so if they think they're gonna get something MUCH different from Vista, they've got another thing coming :p

Oh man S**U, please... don't make me wanna cry...

IF IT'S A FREAKING MINOR UPDATE, WHY THE HELL IS IT A NEW VERSION? (6.0 -> 7.0) IT IS NOT A NEW BUILD, NOT A NEW MILESTONE, NOT A NEW CRAP, NOT A NEW SVN OR WHATEVER, IT'S A NEW VERSION!

Thanks for reaching my point and understanding my anger.

Uhh...did you even read what I said? I said 2Gb for a $400 laptop isn't inconceivable, not 4Gb. Show me where I said 4Gb, please.

And there's a very good reason you don't see many laptops with 6 or 8Gb of RAM - the bloody OS can't support it! Sure, you can get 64bit OS's, but why bother dealing with all the potential technical problems of incompatibilities with software and drivers when you can just give the customer a 32bit OS and spend the money on a built-in webcam or better graphics card or, better yet, profit?

I just had a look on Dell's website and the first laptop I seen was priced at $500 and had 2Gb of RAM, so I'm not exactly far off, am I?

Look harder next time. And pay more attention, too.

Huh? where did I say 2GB? THIS is what my reply to you is about, and where you said 4Gb

with a lot of the mainstream priced lappys giving you 4Gb.

I'm telling you there's no "mainstream lappy" giving you 4Gb. I didn't say anything about 2Gb at all, I'm just talking about your hallucinated "mainstream priced" 4Gb lappy :rolleyes:

I'm quite fine, it's you who should look harder next time, and pay more attention, and try look at what you yourself have written, and learn to count :laugh:

Edited by wellofsouls
Huh? where did I say 2GB? THIS is what my reply to you is about, and what you said 4Gb

I'm telling you there's no "mainstream lappy" giving you 4Gb. I didn't say anything about 2Gb at all, I'm just talking about your hallucinated "mainstream priced" 4Gb lappy :rolleyes:

I'm quite fine, it's you who should look harder next time, and pay more attention, and try look at what you yourself have written, and learn to count :laugh:

I KNOW you didn't say anything about 2Gb, that's what I'm correcting you about.

You said, and I quote:

LOL, then please find a $400 laptop with 4G RAM for me, I'll pay you $800 for it.

Where did I say you'd get 4Gb in a $400 laptop? Where? Come on, don't hold back now, show me where I said you'd get 4Gb of RAM in a $400 laptop.

If you're referring to me saying that you get 4Gb in a MAINSTREAM laptop, then you're mistaken about what a "mainstream" laptop actually is.

$400 isn't "mainstream", mainstream is around the $1000 mark. $400 is budget, $1500-2000+ is high-end.

Not believe me? Google "mainstream laptop" and see what prices come up.

And there's a very good reason you don't see many laptops with 6 or 8Gb of RAM - the bloody OS can't support it! Sure, you can get 64bit OS's, but why bother dealing with all the potential technical problems of incompatibilities with software and drivers when you can just give the customer a 32bit OS and spend the money on a built-in webcam or better graphics card or, better yet, profit?

LOL, that's not a good reason, or more precisely, not a valid reason at all. By your reasoning, there shouldn't be any desktop with 8G RAM neither, which is not true. Also those laptops with 4G RAM are already mostly DTR MONSTERS that come with 64-bit Vista and target enthusiasts only, they are the TOP of the TOP, they won't be concerned with 32-bit OS compatibility. There may be lots of reasons why the current laptop manufacturers stops at 4G instead of 6G or 8G, but the 32-bit OS support thing is definitely NOT one of them. Profit is also not a problem, since the 4G RAM laptops are already highest-end for enthusiasts, so they can price the laptops over the Heavens and there still gonna be enthusiasts buying them.

The thing is, you won't get a mainstream priced laptop with 4G RAM. And currently those laptops with 4G RAM are already the TOP, so 2GB is FAR from low-end.

funny thing is none of my friends have one problem with Vista, nor have I, since RTM. People don't give Vista enough credit. It has come a long way since Beta 1. People just don't like change and although not everyone is like this it seems most are too stubborn to just take a good look at something, they just would rather go with the crowd and say oh yeah it sucks it has sooo many problems. Then...you have not used a Vista operating system for very long then, or you're too incompetent to run a computer.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Yup, that's a doozy right there 😄
    • It's a bundle of tools created by a variety of people, so things can go wrong sometimes. It's a great addition to Windows, and I use a lot of the tools on a daily basis. Also, it's still a 0.**** release so quick updates are to be expected 😉
    • Oh, I did. And it's even worse than I was hoping! Besides a lot of techno-babble jargon (yes I understand 100% of it but it's still all just techno-babble) there's 2 key points that make me super-weary about even considering testing this out. -- By default, after installation, a relay is automatically set up, so you do not need to care about that. * Non-chatmail apps use email servers as a long-term message archive while chatmail clients use email servers for ephemeral instant message relay. * Supporting the full variety of classic email setups would require considerable development and maintenance efforts, and complicate making chatmail-based messaging more resilient, reliable and fast. -- Basically, the end-user device is the 'server' (relay) so there is NO ARCHIVING whatsoever because every message is necessarily ephemeral. Great for techno-paranoia (and for illicit activities preferring no tracks to cover) but terrible for everybody else. It's also ironically contradictory to engineering principles of redundancies besides the transport layers due to the explicit absence of any persistent storage. Instead of 'classic email address' retaining multi-GB messaging archives on its server, now every device must retain 100% of those storage demands. (Email messages were originally meant to be short correspondences, not the multi-MB attachments boondoggle that now exists with unlimited spam engines flooding every potential recipient.) Any device swap or reset (or loss) makes the entire message history go bye-bye forever... lest there's an off-device auto-archival "relay" mechanism that's really a separate server that holds onto all transported messages (an email server) that utilizes 'chatmail email address' identities (like an email server) and its own persistent storage archive (like an email server). But... this solution is hoping to exist alongside real-world email address identities (based on the email server relay pathway) but simply render messages in chat thread format in an ephemeral manner (with contents being encrypted, and messages auto-expiring) ... In the end, it's a chat app/experience for the Web3/P2P-at-all-costs zealots. (I have accts on all sorts of federated web3 services so I understand the technical and non-technical alike.) For any practical users, however, it's just another service to download/install, register, cross-share id cards/qr codes, but know that there's no history/archive whatsoever (by design) so no account/message recovery whatsoever... update the device, install a bummed update patch, or dare upgrade your device... all history, poof, gone. Ya gotta start everything over again like they're a brand new person.
    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!