"Chambers" <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote:
> So, I bit the bullet and installed Vista Ultimate 64.  And I've been
> working with it a few weeks now.  And what do I think?
>
>
>
> I think people just like to complain about Microsoft for no good reason
> at all.
>
>
>
> Caveat: I have a Core 2 Duo processor, 3GB of RAM, and a decent video
> card (7600GT).  Obviously, if you try to run it on a ten-year-old
> laptop, you're going to have more problems than I do.
>

My first experience with Vista was on a low end laptop I purchased early this
year, a 1.8Ghz Celeron with 1GB memory.  Performance is not very good, it is
slower than my much older laptop, a 1Ghz AMD with 256M running XP home.  I
definitly need to add more memory.  The only thing I like better about Vista is
it's wireless networking.  Vista is much better at detecting and maintaining
connections.  Last month I purchased a new desktop, Intel quad-core with 5GB
memory, running Vista 64-bit.  For cpu intensive work, the quad-core runs much
faster than my older dual-core pc.  But for other workloads, such as e-mail,
web surfing, word processing etc., it sometimes seems a little sluggish.

>
>
> Anyway, Vista actually runs faster than my XP Pro installation did, but
> only just.  The real kicker for me is the disk usage. one thing that's
> happened to me several times now, is coming into the room, and thinking
> the computer was turned off.  I moved the mouse just to make sure, and
> the think woke up - completely silent.  Even leaving it running a video
> encode (I'm still in the process of moving my DVD library to my hdd.
> I've had several false starts, and changed my mind on format / quality
> settings a couple of times*), the thing will be darn near noiseless.
>

I haven't noticed any change in noise, but thats probably do to the other three
desktops running.

>
>
> UAC doesn't bother me at all.  But then, I understand what it's there
> for, and I'd much rather have it ask me than not.  Besides, it's no
> worse than the equivalents in Linux and Mac OS.
>

Though I understand what UAC is for, it can still be a PITA.  When I install new
software, I usually turn it off until I get the new software working, then turn
it back on.  For other users who don't have a clue, I'm not sure how effective
it will be.  I have a son-in-law who is completely clueless when it comes to
computers.  He currently runs XP, but I don't think Vista would make any
difference. If a message box popped up asking for permission to install a
virus, he would probably click OK.  About twice a year I have to go over and
clean out his pc.

>
>
> And the GUI?  I waited almost two years after Windows XP was introduced
> before I switched from 2K - the XP GUI drove me nuts, and as soon as I
> found out about FlyAKiteOSX, I switched my GUI to be a Mac clone.  With
> Vista, I liked the GUI straight away.
>

The GUI is ok, it looks nice.  It's just taking me awhile to find where MS has
moved everything.

>
>
> Given how impressed I also am with Office 2007 (separate topic), I think
> I'm actually turning into an MS fan.
>
>

Though not an MS fan, they do write reasonably good software.  A bit bloated at
times, but no worse than most other developers.

>
> ...Ben Chambers
>
> www.pacificwebguy.com

Isaac

Post a reply to this message