Closing the Door to Microsoft Vista

[Kushan]

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.

No, it really is a valid reason. Support costs money, 64bit means extra support. That plus 4Gb is still seen as a LOT of RAM anyway. Quite simply, they don't NEED to offer more at that price point, it's more worthwhile them either pocketing the extra cash or putting in a bigger hard drive or faster processor...

Oh and I never said there were NO laptops with greater than 4Gb of RAM, what I said was there were not MANY.

But sure, you're probably right, you wouldn't be able to find a $1000 laptop with 4Gb of RAM. Oh wait.

I don't really know what it is that you're trying to prove, that you can't read, can't do maths, or both.

P.S. Thanks for ignoring my previous post! ;)

[wellofsouls]

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

What are you correcting when I didn't say anything about 2Gb? So I guess you are correcting at nothing :laugh:

You said, and I quote:

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.

I replied to your post about 4Gb, then you replied to my post with $400, that's where.

I show you to the same place where you somehow replied 2Gb to my post about your talk of 4Gb. If you can't make a coherent reply, what do you expect others to reply to your incoherent stuff :laugh:

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.

Since you can't read others post coherently, I have to point you to my first reply to you again

I wonder what you consider as "mainstream" price? IMHO, "mainstream" price should be at least less than US$1000.

Also your price segmentation has quite a lot of gaps. $400 is budget, $1000 is mainstream, that leaves a $600 gap in-between :o

From how HP and DELL segment their laptop price:

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping.../psg/notebooks/

http://www.dell.com/content/products/categ...;l=en&s=dhs

Anything more than $1000 is definitely NOT mainstream :no:

Edited May 17, 2008 by wellofsouls

[wellofsouls]

No, it really is a valid reason. Support costs money, 64bit means extra support. That plus 4Gb is still seen as a LOT of RAM anyway. Quite simply, they don't NEED to offer more at that price point, it's more worthwhile them either pocketing the extra cash or putting in a bigger hard drive or faster processor...

Oh and I never said there were NO laptops with greater than 4Gb of RAM, what I said was there were not MANY.

Huh? So what's the extra 64bit support when you already ship laptops with 64bit systems? 64bit may be extra support compared to before, but currently they already ship 64bit systems with laptops with 4GB or less RAM already, so your "reason" is completely invalid.

Oh, and find me a laptop with greater than 4G RAM, if you think they currently exist ;)

But sure, you're probably right, you wouldn't be able to find a $1000 laptop with 4Gb of RAM. Oh wait.

I don't really know what it is that you're trying to prove, that you can't read, can't do maths, or both.

LOL, now you have exactly proven yourself to be unable to read, unable to count, and only do "maths" that in your own hallucinations. Thank you :laugh:

P.S. Thanks for ignoring my previous post! ;)

You have also proven yourself to be extremely impatient, so you now have to eat your thanks back unfortunately :D

[Kushan]

To sum up your argument, you're basically bitching about the meaning of the term "mainstream", which is entirely irrelevant as what I'm saying is if you're going to spend about $1000 on a laptop, you can get 4Gb of RAM if you look around. That's my point, that's the point that keeps flying over your head, that's the point you keep missing. Got that?

Let me repeat myself for the 3rd time:

I did not say you could get 4Gb of RAM in a $400 laptop

Also, I was not aware that everyone had to price laptops at EXACT prices, thank you for informing me of this huge blunder of mine and everyone else's. I'll write an email off to Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. and inform them that they're not allowed to sell laptops at prices outside of those deemed by you.

Actually no, you're just being silly and arguing for the sake of arguing, but on the offchance that you actually are just being slow today, let me reiterate what I was saying, only in a way you might just understand:

"Budget" laptops are priced somewhere in the $400-500 price range. They CAN go outside of that range, though! a $599 laptop is thus a high-end budget laptop.

"Mainstream" (pay attention now, this is the part you have trouble grasping) is AROUND the $1000 mark. You can tell this because the vast majority of Dell's (and similar) laptops start at around the $999 mark. Once again, prices may be slightly different, so an $800 laptop will be a "low-end mainstream" laptop.

$1500 and beyond (Although some would say $2000 and beyond, but I'm being nice to you) are what you'd call "high-end" or professional laptops. These will definitely have 4Gb of RAM, if not more.

Anyway the point is RAM is cheap, it's a lot cheaper than it was before and barring the odd price hike (RAM prices do fluctuate), you can easily get a sub-$1500 (That's right, sub-high end, in other words, mainstream) laptop with 4Gb of RAM if you shop around. Not believe me? Try reading one of my above posts where I even link to one.

EDIT:

Huh? So what's the extra 64bit support when you already ship laptops with 64bit systems? 64bit may be extra support compared to before, but currently they already ship 64bit systems with laptops with 4GB or less RAM already, so your "reason" is completely invalid.

Oh, and find me a laptop with greater than 4G RAM, if you think they currently exist ;)

LOL, now you have exactly proven yourself to be unable to read, unable to count, and only do "maths" that in your own hallucinations. Thank you :laugh:

You have also proven yourself to be extremely impatient, so you now have to eat your thanks back unfortunately :D

I said it was just one reason, out of many, what exactly is your point? You even said this yourself:

There may be lots of reasons why the current laptop manufacturers stops at 4G instead of 6G or 8G

I don't really see what you're trying to say here....

Put it this way, if 64bit was all fine and dandy, it would be getting shipped as STANDARD right now.

As for a laptop with greater than 4Gb of RAM - would there be any point in me showing you? Lets run with what you're saying for a moment, say that 4Gb really IS the maximum, then why would that necessarily mean that lower end laptops have less? Surely if you hit a hardware limitation, then all it means is the price will get reduced and thus lower tier models will have the same as higher-tier ones? You know, kinda like a mainstream laptop having the same amount of RAM has a high-end one...

And are you seriously going to complain that I can't use that laptop as an example because it's a whole $60 more than $1000? Get lost, you really are just arguing for the sake of it now and I've had enough.

Edited May 17, 2008 by Kushan

[wellofsouls]

To sum up your argument, you're basically bitching about the meaning of the term "mainstream", which is entirely irrelevant as what I'm saying is if you're going to spend about $1000 on a laptop, you can get 4Gb of RAM if you look around. That's my point, that's the point that keeps flying over your head, that's the point you keep missing. Got that?

lol, so you indeed can't read. My arugument is that your "a lot of the mainstream priced lappys giving you 4Gb" statement is ridiculous. And now you try to sneakily switch it into "if you're going to spend about $1000 on a laptop, you can get 4Gb of RAM if you look around". That's some debate skills I have to say :laugh:

Let me repeat myself for the 3rd time:

I did not say you could get 4Gb of RAM in a $400 laptop

And I didn't say anything about 2Gb. You are the one who suddenly starts to be rude out of nowhere and tell people to "do maths" with 2Gb when I'm talking about the 4Gb part mentioned in your post. It's your first reply to my post that makes no sense at all, so what do you expect? You now complain others not replying coherently to your post when the said post of yours is an incoherent reply to start with, lol :rolleyes:

Also, I was not aware that everyone had to price laptops at EXACT prices, thank you for informing me of this huge blunder of mine and everyone else's. I'll write an email off to Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. and inform them that they're not allowed to sell laptops at prices outside of those deemed by you.

Actually no, you're just being silly and arguing for the sake of arguing, but on the offchance that you actually are just being slow today, let me reiterate what I was saying, only in a way you might just understand:

LOL, you really can't read can you? I'm showing you links from their official site, so naturally those prices are deemed by them, NOT me, but I guess you lack this simple logic. And it's you who decide to suddenly jump at one reply not agreeing with you and become rude for no reason at all. Again, I point you to my first reply to you

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

I clearly said IMHO here, so if you say you think US$1200 is still mainstream for you, then we can just agree to disagree. Everyone can has his/her own opinions. But alas, you just decide to go bonkers and tell people to "do maths" and pull some "2Gb", "$400" out of nowhere :rolleyes:

$1500 and beyond (Although some would say $2000 and beyond, but I'm being nice to you) are what you'd call "high-end" or professional laptops. These will definitely have 4Gb of RAM, if not more.

oh? "definitely"? You should really check your eyes, since obviously they have some problems :

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping...name=HDX_series

And again I hope you can find a laptop "more" than 4G of RAM, aside from your hallucination.

[wellofsouls]

I said it was just one reason, out of many, what exactly is your point? You even said this yourself:

I don't really see what you're trying to say here....

Put it this way, if 64bit was all fine and dandy, it would be getting shipped as STANDARD right now.

So you are really being selectively blind here. Maybe you should read the part JUST after the line you have quoted

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.

I'm saying that your OS support thing is NOT a valid reason here. And 64bit Vista IS getting shipped as STANDARD on many laptops already, maybe you should really open your eyes. Since they already ship 64bit Vista as default systems on many high-end laptops, so by simple logic, saying they don't make 8G laptop because they don't want to provide support for 64-bit OS is just ridiculous and invalid.

As for a laptop with greater than 4Gb of RAM - would there be any point in me showing you? Lets run with what you're saying for a moment, say that 4Gb really IS the maximum, then why would that necessarily mean that lower end laptops have less? Surely if you hit a hardware limitation, then all it means is the price will get reduced and thus lower tier models will have the same as higher-tier ones? You know, kinda like a mainstream laptop having the same amount of RAM has a high-end one...

I'm asking you to show a laptop with greater than 4Gb of RAM because it's ridiculous for you to even think right now such a laptop even exist. It undermines your credibility here. I hope you can get out of your hallucinated "for a moment" here and find a laptop with more than 4Gb RAM for sale in the real world. whether a mainstream laptop having the same amount of RAM as a high-end one is irrelevant here, since you've already derailed it from a logical and friendly debate with your sudden outbursts of nonsense.

And are you seriously going to complain that I can't use that laptop as an example because it's a whole $60 more than $1000? Get lost, you really are just arguing for the sake of it now and I've had enough.

you are the one who IS getting lost in "maths" and numbers. You are the one who starts being rude and arguing only for the sake of it here. And it seems you are still not having enough yet :rolleyes:

Edited May 17, 2008 by wellofsouls

[Tokar]

Companies don't want to spend allot of money on comp hardware to get it running up to speed.

Simple as that. Vista is a terrific OS it just has this bloat on pre-modern machines

It's their business if they want to wait, it's not our job to convince anyone.

You make it seem like Windows 7 is not going to require a hardware update. If anything Windows 7 will require even more beefier hardware in your computer - that is expected with new Windows versions.

I think that if the US economy was better you would see companies having no problem fitting the bill to do company-wide upgrades to new hardware and Vista. But seeing as how Vista provides no significant gains over XP in terms of productivity for the corporate environment, upgrading is just an unnecessary expense which saves a company millions (millions not only in buying new computers and licenses of Vista-supported software versions, but millions in tech support labor for installation and setup, and millions in disposal of old hardware).

[asoldier]

HP Pavillion dv9000 3gb DDR2 Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8ghz x86(with x64 module) on Nvidia GeForce 8600gs (512mb) and dual 160 (RAID) hard drives... without a hitch. I'm anxious to see SP1 (I'm in Iraq so Windows update is a hell of a download)

I guess, then, that I'm running Microsoft's "Epic Fail" flawlessly, on x64 no less. Amazing. :rolleyes:

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

HP Pavillion dv9000 3gb DDR2 Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8ghz x86(with x64 module) on Nvidia GeForce 8600gs (512mb) and dual 160 (RAID) hard drives... without a hitch. I'm anxious to see SP1 (I'm in Iraq so Windows update is a hell of a download)

Ya me too :)

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

It amazes me at how people twist others' words around .....

I'm not gonna participate in their petty arguments.

[jesseinsf]

Stop complaining people, and Stop Installing Vista on your 4 year old computers and start using current technology.

[oCYBERDOGo]

There is nothing wrong with Vista, it seems GM has a poor IT department if you ask me.

GM's IT department is ousourced by EDS started by Ross Perot and now owned by whom?

Ahh yes HP

It'll be interesting to see what happens with EDS and Dell now that EDS is PWNED by HP!

As far as the corporation I work at we are not deploying Vista at all. Were doing a PC refresh going to Exchange Server 2008, and Outlook and guess what OS will be on those New Dells and Lenovo's in the corporation? XP.

Also just happens that EDS just won a contract for server support where I work and will be interesting to see what happens.

Edited May 20, 2008 by NeoFyLe

[revvo]

You'll find Windows 2000 still running on many computers today, which is why it's still supported by Microsoft with updates.

Companies do not install the latest, bleeding-edge versions. They're not computer enthusiasts. They better see a or many benefits in rolling out new operating systems because like he said, time is money in business.