<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Can&#8217;t understand the Vista loathing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fadingwhispers.org/home/2008/10/19/cant-understand-the-vista-loathing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fadingwhispers.org/home/2008/10/19/cant-understand-the-vista-loathing/</link>
	<description>A chronicle of my passions in life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 22:52:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jane Ullah</title>
		<link>http://fadingwhispers.org/home/2008/10/19/cant-understand-the-vista-loathing/comment-page-1/#comment-726</link>
		<dc:creator>Jane Ullah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Feb 2009 02:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fadingwhispers.org/home/?p=600#comment-726</guid>
		<description>A few points:

1) I read the &#039;fineprint&#039; of MS Vista and I accordingly purchased a laptop that could run Vista (superbly) for under $1,500.

That said, my experience on said computer system has possibly been biased because with my computer&#039;s specs, I can comfortably use all the shiny bells and whistles that Vista has. 

However, your criticisms are absolutely valid, but I don&#039;t think that Microsoft misled anyone about the specs that would be required to run their operating systems to its potential.

Vista as a business utility, is not viable because of those same bells and whistles that I like so much. Right now, I can barely run certain programs on an XP desktop at my office!

In a nutshell, I&#039;m not very knowledgeable about the inner workings of the operating system. Microsoft marketed Vista in a shady way and it came back to bite them in the butt, plain and simple.

Thanks for your comment because it made me think about the reasons for supporting Vista.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few points:</p>
<p>1) I read the &#8216;fineprint&#8217; of MS Vista and I accordingly purchased a laptop that could run Vista (superbly) for under $1,500.</p>
<p>That said, my experience on said computer system has possibly been biased because with my computer&#8217;s specs, I can comfortably use all the shiny bells and whistles that Vista has. </p>
<p>However, your criticisms are absolutely valid, but I don&#8217;t think that Microsoft misled anyone about the specs that would be required to run their operating systems to its potential.</p>
<p>Vista as a business utility, is not viable because of those same bells and whistles that I like so much. Right now, I can barely run certain programs on an XP desktop at my office!</p>
<p>In a nutshell, I&#8217;m not very knowledgeable about the inner workings of the operating system. Microsoft marketed Vista in a shady way and it came back to bite them in the butt, plain and simple.</p>
<p>Thanks for your comment because it made me think about the reasons for supporting Vista.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martyn Hare</title>
		<link>http://fadingwhispers.org/home/2008/10/19/cant-understand-the-vista-loathing/comment-page-1/#comment-722</link>
		<dc:creator>Martyn Hare</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:05:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fadingwhispers.org/home/?p=600#comment-722</guid>
		<description>There is a lot of reasons Vista is not very good.

First of all, most of the great &quot;improvements&quot; slow the system down.  When you turn those off you get a system that is round about what Windows 2000 or Server 2003 (Volume Licenced) is.

Aero (Glass or Basic) is good-looking but slows performance, turning it off makes the system look like the classic Windows - you can&#039;t win!

UAC was a good idea, but WTF screen-dimming?  A simple window that does not steal focus would have been better.  GNU/Linux learnt from this with the hideous gksu ages ago!  So off that goes...

Also, more stupid processes are in the background than ever by default.  

They added a crippleware malware scanner called Windows Defender which wastes Hard Disk and CPU time.

Then there&#039;s the ghastly and ineffective System Restore that started life in ME and managed to survive in XP.

From a business standpoint, large enterprises now need an extra server in their backroom to manage product activations (nice?).

Naturally.. the biggest problem with Vista is Microsoft&#039;s assume-all-users-are-pirates initiative.  Yet, it&#039;s easily possible to null a copy of Server 2008 which Microsoft offer as an evaluation on their website.

Windows 7 fixed the UAC problem but overall it won&#039;t be much better judging by the BETA.

All that adds up to a rotten experience. When Windows 2000 is no longer supported GNU/Linux will probably be the only OS I use. (Or maybe OpenSolaris when it has matured to where other OSes are at)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a lot of reasons Vista is not very good.</p>
<p>First of all, most of the great &#8220;improvements&#8221; slow the system down.  When you turn those off you get a system that is round about what Windows 2000 or Server 2003 (Volume Licenced) is.</p>
<p>Aero (Glass or Basic) is good-looking but slows performance, turning it off makes the system look like the classic Windows &#8211; you can&#8217;t win!</p>
<p>UAC was a good idea, but WTF screen-dimming?  A simple window that does not steal focus would have been better.  GNU/Linux learnt from this with the hideous gksu ages ago!  So off that goes&#8230;</p>
<p>Also, more stupid processes are in the background than ever by default.  </p>
<p>They added a crippleware malware scanner called Windows Defender which wastes Hard Disk and CPU time.</p>
<p>Then there&#8217;s the ghastly and ineffective System Restore that started life in ME and managed to survive in XP.</p>
<p>From a business standpoint, large enterprises now need an extra server in their backroom to manage product activations (nice?).</p>
<p>Naturally.. the biggest problem with Vista is Microsoft&#8217;s assume-all-users-are-pirates initiative.  Yet, it&#8217;s easily possible to null a copy of Server 2008 which Microsoft offer as an evaluation on their website.</p>
<p>Windows 7 fixed the UAC problem but overall it won&#8217;t be much better judging by the BETA.</p>
<p>All that adds up to a rotten experience. When Windows 2000 is no longer supported GNU/Linux will probably be the only OS I use. (Or maybe OpenSolaris when it has matured to where other OSes are at)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
