Microsoft Windows Vista

[the_ghost_of_you]

Hey everyone. I found this... it looks cool. I want one. Heres a link: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/default.mspx

 

[15357]

Yay!

Except the name sucks.

 

[Ren.182]

I've grown to like the name now.
Looking forward to it comming out.

 

[15357]

I hope it makes you use internet explorer instead of the... filthy... can't.. speak.. name........ thingy.

 

[duffers20]

I like the name now, didn't at first, but I have to say that it does look cool. If you can use the effects like the transparency etc in custom themes, then that should be cool, get a really ace lookign theme to go with it because I always think that the standard windows themes are alittle chunky.

 

[DigiQ8]

i always call it Windows V
i got the Beta 1 , the interface is great , but too many bugs in the first beta

 

[Adabiviak]

I understand Vista is a complete rewrite of the OS. What can I expect Vista to do fundamentally better than other versions of Windows? Let me explain my previous gains with previous versions to help demonstrate what I'm looking for.

Win 3.1 to Win 95: 32 bit support, substantially better UI. I actually started with 95 but used 3.1 a little in school.

Win95 to Win98: Stability and USB support. Win 98SE was very stable for me and only crashed if I did something stupid.

Win98 to WinXP: Driver support. The only reason I went from 98SE to XP was because the driver support rocks - I've never plugged in anything that XP didn't recognize and automatically support. XP gets a bonus because it'll handle some stupid things I do as well. XP has never ever crashed on me.

WinXP to Win Vista: do tell! What does Vista have to offer? Here's what I have read...
1) Parental controls. Maybe when I have kids, but I haven't used XP's controls so I don't have a comparison.
2) Fast on and off. Nice.
3) Diagnostics. My hardware comes with diagnostics and the online freeware is plenty. Elaborate?
4) User account protection. The administrative lockdown on XP works fine for me. I think Microsoft got tired of people calling in because their computers were molested by people who took advantage of them always using administrator accounts, and this makes it easier for them.
5) New look and feel / Familiarity. Different UI? XPs is fine.
6) Media center. No way! I can't stand Windows Media player already, the last thing I want is one that is more invasive.
7) Virtual folders. Meh - I'll organize my own files, thanks.
8) Integrated searches. XPs searches work fine for me. What's different about the Quick Search box than hitting Flag-F? You can add or edit file properties? That doesn't seem new to me.
9) Live Icons. Again, I'll organize my own files, thanks. If I don't have the files stored in a folder with a name that obviously indicates what's in it, shame on me. The current thumbnail system works fine in a pinch too.
10) XPS. Sounds like Adobe.
11) Photos. Please - win 98 could do this and XP does.
12) RSS feeds. Never used these - could be good?
13) Device Synchronization. How long have PDAs been around doing this? I have a very old tablet with 95 on it, and it synchronizes files on a thumbdrive and a palmtop.
14) Mobility. I actually know a guy who has a laptop that never leaves his desk. Seriously, though, is this an improvement over current laptop setups? I have a tablet with the Windows tablet OS, and, well, it does all that. Does XP not support 802.11 or Bluetooth standards?
15) Digital media. Now this has been done since digital media has been available. It has become easier with advances in hardware, not the OS. Windows 3.1 with a good sound and video card could do this.
16) HDTV. HDTV support typically comes from your video card mfr - I'm using HDTV now, and am using XP.

...so I'm in the market for a new OS. Microsoft hasn't sold it to me with their website (see above). Maybe the readers here can help me see something in Vista that is fundamentally better (read: worth the purchase price). I'll get this shortly anyway from work where I'll dig around and look for myself, but if anyone has used it already or read something that I missed, please let me know!

 

[Gray Fox]

But the pallidium and trusted computing technology scares me a little.
Esoecially since it supposed to be made with a backdoor for the US intelligens agencies, and that backdoor will be even in PC's sold in the EU.
Plus it could force DRM on us in a really privacy intruding way.

On the other hand it may be a lot better protected against viruses.
I think corporations are going to love it, but if the good points will outweigh the bad point for home users remainds to be seen.

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002june/gee20020624015112.htm
http://www.epic.org/privacy/consumer/microsoft/palladium.html
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

Best link: http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/07/11/palladium/

 

[WhiteZero]

I understand Vista is a complete rewrite of the OS. What can I expect Vista to do fundamentally better than other versions of Windows? Let me explain my previous gains with previous versions to help demonstrate what I'm looking for.

Win 3.1 to Win 95: 32 bit support, substantially better UI. I actually started with 95 but used 3.1 a little in school.

Win95 to Win98: Stability and USB support. Win 98SE was very stable for me and only crashed if I did something stupid.

Win98 to WinXP: Driver support. The only reason I went from 98SE to XP was because the driver support rocks - I've never plugged in anything that XP didn't recognize and automatically support. XP gets a bonus because it'll handle some stupid things I do as well. XP has never ever crashed on me.

WinXP to Win Vista: do tell! What does Vista have to offer? Here's what I have read...
1) Parental controls. Maybe when I have kids, but I haven't used XP's controls so I don't have a comparison.
2) Fast on and off. Nice.
3) Diagnostics. My hardware comes with diagnostics and the online freeware is plenty. Elaborate?
4) User account protection. The administrative lockdown on XP works fine for me. I think Microsoft got tired of people calling in because their computers were molested by people who took advantage of them always using administrator accounts, and this makes it easier for them.
5) New look and feel / Familiarity. Different UI? XPs is fine.
6) Media center. No way! I can't stand Windows Media player already, the last thing I want is one that is more invasive.
7) Virtual folders. Meh - I'll organize my own files, thanks.
8) Integrated searches. XPs searches work fine for me. What's different about the Quick Search box than hitting Flag-F? You can add or edit file properties? That doesn't seem new to me.
9) Live Icons. Again, I'll organize my own files, thanks. If I don't have the files stored in a folder with a name that obviously indicates what's in it, shame on me. The current thumbnail system works fine in a pinch too.
10) XPS. Sounds like Adobe.
11) Photos. Please - win 98 could do this and XP does.
12) RSS feeds. Never used these - could be good?
13) Device Synchronization. How long have PDAs been around doing this? I have a very old tablet with 95 on it, and it synchronizes files on a thumbdrive and a palmtop.
14) Mobility. I actually know a guy who has a laptop that never leaves his desk. Seriously, though, is this an improvement over current laptop setups? I have a tablet with the Windows tablet OS, and, well, it does all that. Does XP not support 802.11 or Bluetooth standards?
15) Digital media. Now this has been done since digital media has been available. It has become easier with advances in hardware, not the OS. Windows 3.1 with a good sound and video card could do this.
16) HDTV. HDTV support typically comes from your video card mfr - I'm using HDTV now, and am using XP.

Well, you left out quite a bit of stuff for the 98 to XP. Like oh... I dunno, NTFS, using the NT platform in general, which means no DOS and thusly no BSoD, and tons of new features (which you didnt leave out of the XP to Vista part)

 

[Washuu]

Yay for bloatware and DRM, Screw microsoft.

Only thing I looked foward to on that OS was an improved filesystem that didn't require defragmentations, like MAC OS & Linux. They were going to have that, but they sucked at it and decided to leave it was a later "upgrade" that wont happen for a long time.

I'm sorry, but this OS blows, I used Windows and Linux because I didn't want a fancy OS bogging down my system like MAC OS, but now, they brought all evils into one.

They are coming out with like 17 versions of this OS ( not quite sure actual number, but a lot), and the cheaper versions just have stuff disabled making them useless, but they exist to make the ones with more features to be better so they can overprice them way over the cheaper ones ( like $600+ for the most expensive, which would actually have features I would need to be satisfied if I ever wanted to use the operating system )

My solution to this Operating System: Live on Windows 2000/XP till they are obsolete then while I'm waiting for this to happen, master Linux and hope that all my games work on it.

 

[giant384]

i like the name better than longhorn

 

[The Mullinator]

The only reason I will even consider switching to Vista is to ensure I can run programs that I buy in the future as efficiently as possible. Its almost a given that support for XP will start slipping and I will have to update in order to make sure I can use everything.

All those new features seem pretty useless and not worth the cost of getting a new OS. Unfortunately I will be forced to get it anyway.

 

[Dekstar]

Just pirate it if you won't be able to afford the deerer versions?

 

[Cole]

Heres what vista will offer

-Hardware Accelerated (Takes Advantage of Graphic Cards)
-32bit/64bit.
-IE7
-New file system
-Ability to tune your computer manually or automatically so it works at highest function all the time.
-Complete Rewrite
-More Stable
-3D desktop possibilities
-Live Thumbnails(Flip 3D, a pimped out Alt-Tab)
-Extensive use of properties
@You can add extra file information easily to the file.

-Virtual Plus Standard Folders
@You can do a simple search for files in virtual folders with immediate results. A saved search.

-Windows Sidebar
@See: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/images/screenSidebar.jpg

-Synchronous cancellation of I/O requests.
@This feature enables applications to recover when a required resource is in use by another application, thus eliminating a common cause of unresponsive applications.

"3) Diagnostics. My hardware comes with diagnostics and the online freeware is plenty. Elaborate?"
-Windows Vista can easily tell you:
@If memory or a hard drive or networking is going to fail and walk you through exactly how to fix it
@If Detected beforehand, Vista will backup information that will be lost

-Automatic Recovery
@Smaller errors, Windows Vista will be easily able to recover itself from and fix without you needing to do it.

-Better Memory managment
@No small hangups when clicking on start or my computer every now and then. Better use of memory.

-At default can search other computers on your network

-Registry System rather unusued, uses new XML format system thats more efficient and overall better.

-Better default firewall, less need for the average user to have to buy some software to protect his\her self.

-Email Client(Not named) has a built in spam filter. Insantly search for messages.



Basically it's an extremely OS. With making better use of memory, less crashes, hardware accelerated, 64bit(Much Needed), and instant searches, new file system, new registry system, etc... this is a need transitition.

We will need to switch to 64bit one point or another. To achieve a higher level of computing and graphics we will need it. The main thing is that 1gig of memory with 32bit is 512meg in 64bit because memory addresses are twice as long. But it's a transition that will unlock alot of more potential. The faster and easier people see the switch, the more time companies will try and make drivers for Vista, etc... The faster and smoother the better.

 

[Washuu]

I wouldn't even pirate it, not worth the bandwidth and I have 5mbps cable.

 

[Chrysalid]

Basically it's an extremely OS. With making better use of memory, less crashes, hardware accelerated, 64bit(Much Needed), and instant searches, new file system, new registry system, etc... this is a need transitition.

That's what they said about Windows XP, too, and look what we got now: an unstable, horribly insecure piece of shit for which new exploits are found every day. No offense, but do you really believe everything said on Vista marketing ads?

Bloatware, DRM, no thanks, I'll rather live Free as in Freedom.

 

[Cole]

That's what they said about Windows XP, too, and look what we got now: an unstable, horribly insecure piece of shit for which new exploits are found every day. No offense, but do you really believe everything said on Vista marketing ads?

You just showed yourself to be a complete dumbass.
1.)How the **** is it unstable?
2.)Exploits are found everyday because guess what...unlike other Os's people actually look for explots on Xp. I will agree that they could have done better with secruity, but alot of that was fixed with Sp2, thats a main point with Vista. I run Xp for probably about 18 - 22 hours a day. Are there any extra processes running for me that I don't want no? Does my computer act slow...no. Do I have any paid virus programs? NO. I just run Ad-Aware and Microsofts own program. Do they ever show anything? Nope.

And this is a needed transition and Microsoft has never said that, I have always said that. Going to a 64bit OS is needed.

 

[StardogChampion]

Does anyone know if it'll be "themeable" without having to patch some dodgy file, or install some dodgy shareware program?

Also, I don't know why Microsoft focused on the searching feature so much, since I barely ever use the search function at all. And that's not just because it's crap.

 

[SubKamran]

Vista is great... I can't install the newest build yet because I have too much to do, but 5219 was awesome stuff. I'd use it all the time except... well, it's beta and not all my games work (Steam and Guild Wars do though!).

 

[WhiteZero]

People talk crap about Windows being insecure when every OS has plenty of vulnerabilities. And 99% of the people that complain about Windows security don't even know what is insecure about it, they just hear it from other people and jump on the bandwaggon.
meh

 

[SubKamran]

You just showed yourself to be a complete dumbass.
1.)How the **** is it unstable?
2.)Exploits are found everyday because guess what...unlike other Os's people actually look for explots on Xp. I will agree that they could have done better with secruity, but alot of that was fixed with Sp2, thats a main point with Vista. I run Xp for probably about 18 - 22 hours a day. Are there any extra processes running for me that I don't want no? Does my computer act slow...no. Do I have any paid virus programs? NO. I just run Ad-Aware and Microsofts own program. Do they ever show anything? Nope.

And this is a needed transition and Microsoft has never said that, I have always said that. Going to a 64bit OS is needed.

Agreed... I've been running XP for a few years and it's never died spontaneously or given Illegal Operations like 98... yuck. I don't have crap running, it's perfectly stable, and it works beautifully...

Vista is a great step up... I dual boot it with XP.

 

[Cole]

Also, I don't know why Microsoft focused on the searching feature so much, since I barely ever use the search function at all. And that's not just because it's crap.

There basically trying to make a more advanced Folder method for those with tons ontop of tons of folders. With far more instant results, and being able to remember previous results and sorting things into virutal folders it works out nicely.

 

[WhiteZero]

Also, I don't know why Microsoft focused on the searching feature so much, since I barely ever use the search function at all. And that's not just because it's crap.

Oh right, cuz MS makes Windows around you...

The average user uses Search quite a bit.

 

[oldagerocker]

So let me get this right, Vista is the new name for longhorn.. not some inbetween OS they're pumping out quick for money before the big one?

 

[Ren.182]

Longhorn was just a projectname. Vista is the Next Windows OS.

So yes, Vista is Longhorn.

 

[furiousV]

Longhorn was just a projectname. Vista is the Next Windows OS.

So yes, Vista is Longhorn.

I thought that was made clear a long time ago . . . :dork:

 

[Ren.182]

I thought that was made clear a long time ago . . . :dork:

It was... Just answering OldAgeRockers question

 

[wakkywheel]

Actually if you think about it the name is quite genious, if I'm not mistaken Vista will be NT6.0 and if you take the first two letters of VIsta you'll see that it is the roman number for 6.

Also if you use the google define:vista you'll get somethin like this up:

* view: the visual percept of a region; "the most desirable feature of the park are the beautiful views"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

* The United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has had automated data processing systems within its medical facilities since before 1985, beginning with the Decentralized Hospital Computer Program information system, including extensive clinical and administrative capabilities. The Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA) supports both ambulatory and inpatient care. VistA includes several significant enhancements to the original DHCP system. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VistA

* VISTA is the Visible & Infrared Survey Telescope for Astronomy, a 4m telescope in development which will be sited at Cerro Paranal in Chile. It is hoped that it will be operational in 2006. It will have a wide field of view, and as the name suggests it will focus on optical and infrared surveys of the sky. VISTA is being built close to ESO's VLT by a consortium of 18 UK universities.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VISTA_(telescope)

* In the fiction of J. R. R. Tolkien, Vista is a part of the atmosphere that surrounds the world of Arda before the cataclysm at the end of the Second Age. Vista forms the inner layer of normal air: above it is Ilmen, and above that Vaiya.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vista_(Middle-earth)

* Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture VISTA is the primary repository of clinical, administrative/financial, and infrastructure data in VA. It consists of computer systems at each VA medical center and the national network that links them. Within each VISTA implementation is a large number of separate 'modules' or 'packages' designed to store data on a particular subject and to produce management reports.
www.herc.research.med.va.gov/Glossary.htm

* (Veterans Health Information System & Technology Architecture)
www.va.gov/oaa/orientation/admin_acronyms.asp

* A view or prospect through or as through an avenue, trees that form an avenue.
www.dreamghar.com/vdic.html

Which is also kind of interesting, I'd have to say that the Vista name is the Windows name that I'm the most happy with.

And no, I don't work for M$....

 

[gweedodogg69]

I had more problems with Windows 98 than I ever had with XP. In fact...I don't think I've had any problems with XP. XP x64 I had a few problems, but that's given since not much driver support is up for it. I'm running XP Pro SP2 with NOD32 antivirus and it runs smooth as eggs. I'm looking forward to Vista .

Edit: Also MS usually has patches/updates out before the exploit is found. It's users that don't update regularly that get their computers messed with. I usually call it an "ID-10-T" error. (ID10T...idiot) lol,

 

[Cole]

lso MS usually has patches/updates out before the exploit is found.

Thats something I really like about MS. It shows that they are focusing on secruity and looking for all possible bugs and then patching them whether there found or not by hackers.

 

[OCybrManO]

Thats something I really like about MS. It shows that they are focusing on secruity and looking for all possible bugs and then patching them whether there found or not by hackers.

IIRC, there are about 30 unpatched vulnerabilities in the current version of Windows that they know of that remain unpatched... because, so far, other people don't know about them. Also, they patch their software because it's bad business not to patch vulnerabilities that put 90% or more of all of the desktop PC users at risk. When you market something as being "secure" and it's security holes can cause billions of dollars worth of damage... that won't help your image/sales. They're not patching things because they have some moral need to protect the users. It's about business. It's about money. In fact, they've even considered charging for anti-virus software that protects the same holes they haven't patched, yet. How's that for ethics? It's called "extortion." It's like having to pay protection money to the mafia or else they torch your store. Luckily, that idea seems to have been thrown out since the news leaked and everyone was pissed off. Be wary of Microsoft. They don't have the consumer in mind. If there's a reason they've been stepping up their efforts as of late... it's probably because Linux and OS X are slowly eating away at their market share.

 

[Cole]

. because, so far, other people don't know about them.

If other people don't know about them, then how can people know that there are about 30 unpatched vulnerabilites. Did they say "There are 30 unpatched vulernabilties". If people know that there are 30 I would think that they would be working fixes for them.

Be wary of Microsoft. They don't have the consumer in mind.

What company DOES?
Take the food business. I am told to be nice to the customers, my boss refunds just about anything, we pack for customers, etc... why? SO THEY KEEP COMING BACK. If we new they could only shop here, we wouldn't have baggers, we wouldn't refund shit for them it's how the world works.

I see extremely few companies do something for moral ethics, and not for money.

 

[OCybrManO]

If other people don't know about them, then how can people know that there are about 30 unpatched vulnerabilites. Did they say "There are 30 unpatched vulernabilties". If people know that there are 30 I would think that they would be working fixes for them.

The information regarding the number of vulnerabilities and what applications they pertain to got leaked... but not the specifics of the vulnerabilities. I don't have a way of knowing if anyone is working on their solutions. The only information available was that they have been known to exist for quite a while without being patched.

What company DOES?
Take the food business. I am told to be nice to the customers, my boss refunds just about anything, we pack for customers, etc... why? SO THEY KEEP COMING BACK. If we new they could only shop here, we wouldn't have baggers, we wouldn't refund shit for them it's how the world works.

If you think everyone should act like Microsoft because money is all that matters, that's your prerogative. I have higher standards. Morals and profits aren't mutually exclusive. Microsoft just has a long history of underhanded practices, borderline-illegal activies, stealing other people's ideas, false promises, blatant lies, frivolous lawsuits, pushing the industry toward their crappy proprietary formats instead of standards everyone else agrees upon, threatening vendors to get them to not sell/offer alternatives to their software or risk losing the ability to distribute Windows, etc. They've had thirty years to prove themselves... and, so far, all the evidence points to "bastards."

 

[The Mullinator]

Beware the company who has no equal.

Its something I always keep in mind.

 

[Cole]

Microsoft just has a long history of underhanded practices, borderline-illegal activies, stealing other people's ideas, false promises, blatant lies, frivolous lawsuits, pushing the industry toward their crappy proprietary formats instead of standards everyone else agrees upon, threatening vendors to get them to not sell/offer alternatives to their software or risk losing the ability to distribute Windows, etc. They've had thirty years to prove themselves... and, so far, all the evidence points to "bastards."

Yes they are willing to do anything to stay at the top, and if you had a company that big, you would be faced with the same options and you would have to do some hefty stuff to keep your market. What do you expect them to go out and say "Hey Apple and Linux Distrubuters, we feel like we have far to much market share hey we will open us up so you can run any windows application on yours!"

Anyways, Microsoft grew to be this big because hey guess what? They were smart and good and new how to get to the top. Microsoft cannot compete properly with no major competition. They have no one to try and get ahead of to beat.
With browsers they have Firefox and Opera, those 2 are extremly good competitors, and they set the standard and basically push Microsoft to release a better default browser for future windows platforms. Since they have competition in that area, they know what they have to beat and will focus on that.

Without major competition they don't know what to beat, so there trying to beat what they previously did. So far they have done a great job at that. Hackers have basically told Microsoft "Update your secruity", and now they are focusing on that with an upcoming new Service Pack for Xp, and focusing there efforts on it for Vista at the cost of delays.

They have been bastards, but guess what if Apple had the greatest OS, im sure you would be complaining just as much to them as you are to Microsoft right now.
If Linux Distro's became the greatest, well one would think this is the best way to do something, and the other this way thus branching off and creating eachother competition. If one just kicked the others ass now you only have one main Linux Distro. Now they control what goes on.

No matter what, even if Microsoft falls and another Os rises you will have the same amount of compliants the same amount of bullshit it dosn't matter. Every company will do shit like things, escpecially with no competition.

 

[furiousV]

So if Linux becomes "the greatest distro" who exactly will everyone complain to? Linux is not run by a company, such as Microsoft, it is worked on by its community. Rember, linux is the actual kernel, not quite the OS. That would be Fedora Core and Suse and so on.

And about Microsoft looking after their consumers, they have only barely released security patches for IE, and only now that Firefox has come out they finally start adding stuff to it, such as tabbed browsing and more. They just don't want you leaving their products, and want to give you the bare minimum.

What you say about complaining about "the greatest thing" is true, it only when something becomes really successful we start to hate it. We all used to love google, it's a great search engine. Now we are beginning to start to hate it, many beleive it will be "the next Microsoft", others think it will even replace Microsoft.

Back to Vista, and all the promises it has made, I'm not expecting half to be true. With XP, well, more stable? It has crashed the same amount as Windows 95, 98, 2000, even 3.1
And the installer said when an application crashes, you don't need to reboot? I've had to reboot it endless amounts of times and lose quite a bit of hard work. More secure? It seems to have more holes than 2000.
And with SP2, I feel like im treated like a computer idiot when I freshly install it, it spams me more than my inbox does with "wheres your firewall" and "wheres your virus scanner" and "Windows updates", took me a while to switch them off.

I'm not going to judge Vista before I try it, maybe finally Microsoft will do something nice for us. But then there is all this DRM stuff being said.

I could go on, but I'm in college class right now

 

[Cole]

So if Linux becomes "the greatest distro" who exactly will everyone complain to? Linux is not run by a company, such as Microsoft, it is worked on by its community. Rember, linux is the actual kernel, not quite the OS. That would be Fedora Core and Suse and so on.

Yes but those who actually work on it, would be those who run it. Since not every can code, it would be those who work on it that decide what happens. Linux Distrubutions, the people who write them are the people that control them. There are several major distrubutions all trying to beat the other, it's competition. Remove competition, and that one last distrubution will have no clue where to go or what to do. It has nothing to beat so it has to be thinking of completely new innovative things which is by no means an easy task.

And about Microsoft looking after their consumers, they have only barely released security patches for IE, and only now that Firefox has come out they finally start adding stuff to it, such as tabbed browsing and more. They just don't want you leaving their products, and want to give you the bare minimum.

Yes and this is a wake up call that they finally have competition and they can stop sleeping. Firefox is a good thing, not just because it's something else that we can use, but because it will wake up Microsoft and tell them "Hey release a better browser".

What you say about complaining about "the greatest thing" is true, it only when something becomes really successful we start to hate it. We all used to love google, it's a great search engine. Now we are beginning to start to hate it, many beleive it will be "the next Microsoft", others think it will even replace Microsoft.

The fact that Microsoft has said "Google fights like Microsoft", and that Microsoft has lost over 100 employs to Google I can see why we might be saying "It will be the next Microsoft". If it takes Microsoft employs, it takes Microsofts Idea's thus ending up as Microsoft under a new name.

With XP, well, more stable? It has crashed the same amount as Windows 95, 98, 2000, even 3.1

Do you spend all day trying to crash it? I take a crash as a blue screen\restart\frozen computer. I have reached no more than 5 with Xp, and easily over 50 with 98 and far more than a 100 with ME. I havn't messed around with 2000.
XP is extremely stable, I **** around with poorly coded applications when im bored and do I restart after crashing a ton? NO. I don't restart shit when something crashes. I just keep on going with my daily work.

And with SP2, I feel like im treated like a computer idiot when I freshly install it, it spams me more than my inbox does with "wheres your firewall" and "wheres your virus scanner" and "Windows updates", took me a while to switch them off.

Yes, and thats it trying to protect the average consumer. I turned mine off right away because I din't need them. Microsoft needs to protect the average consumer and needs to make programs for the average consumer. It may become annoying to those that arn't average, but hey Windows was not designed with just you in mind.

But then there is all this DRM stuff being said.

I see where companies are coming from with trying to protect there movies, and I agree they have gone to far.

 

[Gray Fox]

While I agree with the XP lovers, I also think it's a great OS and a great improvement.

Microsoft used some very illegal tactics to get so big and they have certainly not always produced the best software.
http://users.aol.com/machcu/amsa.html

 

[furiousV]

Yes but those who actually work on it, would be those who run it. Since not every can code, it would be those who work on it that decide what happens. Linux Distrubutions, the people who write them are the people that control them. There are several major distrubutions all trying to beat the other, it's competition. Remove competition, and that one last distrubution will have no clue where to go or what to do. It has nothing to beat so it has to be thinking of completely new innovative things which is by no means an easy task.

If consumers aren't happy with something with their current distrobution, there is more to choose from. Fedora Core, Suse, Mandriva, Slackware all run around the same kernel, thus your applications will all work. Then there is another community who basically refurbish Red Hat only 2 days or so after an official release has been made.
The whole idea about Open Source is that there is no "one group" or company doing all the work for you, and saying "thsi is it, take it or leave it" and in Microsoft's case, "what else are you going to use?"

Sorry I'm very brief, just got told my group in college is being dissolved, I'll finish this off when I get home. :'(

 

[Cole]

The whole idea about Open Source is that there is no "one group" or company doing all the work for you, and saying "thsi is it, take it or leave it" and in Microsoft's case, "what else are you going to use?"

I understand that. I understand that very well infact. But it does remain, it is all possible that one distrubution gets big, yes people can edit it's code but after it becomes more and more complex, takes advantage of dual cores, etc.. it may be a bitch just figuring how it's all laid out.
Even with open source there can be a monpoly and im just saying, if there was a Linux Distrubution that became greater than all the rest and really became a major OS then a monopoly would occur, those people would have there own company and would figure out one hell of a way to keep there monopoly.