Months go, I reviewed Windows Vista, and concluded: “All in all, I am impressed by Windows Vista […]. Windows Vista is better than XP, and definitely more than just an improved look as many say.” After 5 months of usage, it is time to put that statement into perspective.Hardware Requirements
First and foremost, I want to address the issue of hardware requirements. The laptop on which I originally reviewed Vista was a fairly new one; not extravagant in any way (Intel Pentium M 1.73Ghz, 768MB DDR2-RAM, Ati Radeon x300 with 128Mb of (dedicated) RAM), but certainly well capable of running Windows Vista. Realising not everyone has such a machine sitting around to try Vista on, I wanted to try Vista out on my very old desktop machine. This machine has an AMD Athlon XP 1600+ processor, 768MB of pc133 SD-RAM, an nVIDIA Geforce 6200 with 128MB of RAM, and a 40GB IDE hard drive. Microsoft NL was so kind as to provide OSNews with a review copy of Windows Vista Ultimate for the purposes of this review.
As I had anticipated, this desktop machine was anything but capable of running Vista. It ‘ran’ alright, but that was about al you could say. It took ages to load applications, Explorer was slow, and boot times were nothing to write home about. The installation process also took hours to complete.
What intrigues me the most is the the fact that when Vista was still in development, it ran much faster on that same machine; in fact, it was usable [the video in that post is gone, sadly]. Where in the laptop Vista’s performance improved significantly during the transitions from the release candidate stages to final, this does not seem to be the case on this piece of very low-end hardware.
I can now say that if you want to run Vista comfortably, try to get your hardware up to par with roughly what is in my laptop. While this certainly is not a low-end machine, it is also not as high-end as some people want you to believe. Still, Apple seems to be doing a much better job in the hardware requirements department, and Microsoft can definitely learn a thing or two (or, 25) from their friends in Cupertino.
It is important to note that Ubuntu’s performance in combination with Beryl was not exactly stellar either on the desktop machine. All the effects had a delay and were jittery. Note that I have yet to try running Beryl 0.2-final (I only ran the test versions of 0.2) on this machine.
Annoyances
Annoyances are those things that need time to actually manifest themselves. After only a week or so of usage, it is very difficult to identify those things that will drive you nuts, and that is one of the main reasons why I wanted to write this follow-up.
The first annoyance is one I did already note in my first review: the time it takes for Vista to reconnect to my wireless network after waking from sleep. It may take up to 30-40 seconds before it reconnects, and this is far too long in my book. OSX does it in a few seconds, while Ubuntu 7.04 (ndiswrapper/bcm4318) needs about 5-10 seconds. Some may call this whining, but I regularly need to find something quickly on the internet before I leave for work or university, and then these 30 seconds may mean the difference between catching or missing that train.
The second annoyance evolves around copying small files. As many have already noted on the internet, removing something as small as a shortcut file may take tens of seconds, which is of course ridiculous. Therefore, some have concluded that Vista is slow on disk I/O, but I have observed something different: the actual deletion of the small file take less than a second; what is taking Vista so long is the creation of the progress window and the calculation of how much time is remaining. Hopefully something Microsoft can solve in a service pack.
Thirdly, what is up with the “Windows has blocked startup programs” notification balloon? No matter what I do, it keeps popping up after a reboot. There is no logical method of turning it off, and I don’t even know what it does, since all startup programs it lists are actually running! So what is it blocking?
User Account Control
Contrary to popular belief, User Account Control is not an annoyance. As I have noted many times before, you will only encounter UAC when you change system settings, or are accessing files or locations which do not belong to you; in other words, when you are installing applications which are not yet adapted to the new, stricter UAC (which equals just about any application out there). In my day-to-day usage, I rarely, if ever, encounter UAC.
Some have noted that UAC’s habit of ‘taking over your screen’ is an annoyance. What these people generally do not realise is that this is not a bug, it’s a feature, as they say. UAC prompts live in something called ‘secure desktop mode’; this prevents spoofing of the dialog, presumably making UAC more secure (you can turn secure desktop mode off, but this is not advisable from a security point of view). Interestingly, the gksudo in Ubuntu also takes over your screen (but it does not live in a secure desktop mode). As an added annoyance, the gksudo dialog in Ubuntu will also take over your screen when it originates from a minimised or infocused window; this will not happen in Vista.
Comparing Vista to Its Competition
With all the recent developments concerning Ubuntu and Dell, as well as the increased awareness of Apple among ordinary users, comparing Vista to its competition has become more relevant than it ever was.
Comparing Vista to Leopard, it is interesting to see that Vista actually already implements the biggest user-visible change coming in Leopard: Time Machine. On top of that, it does not only implement it, it does it in a cleaner way. In order for Time Machine to work, you need a second hard drive or partition to back up to; without this, Time Machine will not work. In other words, Time Machine does not allow you to go back to previous revisions of files if you do not own a second (external) hard drive.
Vista, on the other hand, has something called ‘Previous Versions’ (an implementation of Volume Shadow Copy). In the properties dialog of any file/directory, there is a new tab called ‘Previous Versions’, which will allow you to revert back to any previous revision of that specific file/directory (Previous Versions saves around one revision a day). No additional hard drives required. The interface certainly is not as flashy as Leopard’s, but the implementation itself is much cleaner than the crude one in Leopard. The downside is that PV is only available in Vista Business, Enterprise, and Ultimate.
Another big feature in Leopard will be full resolution independence. Vista’s resolution independence is not ‘full’, so on this point, Leopard will certainly be an improvement over Vista.
When it comes to Tiger, Vista does some things better. For instance, User Account Control is more advanced than the implementation of sudo in OSX, but obviously it is important to note that Windows actually needs this. OSX, on the other hand, has had far (far!) less security issues than Windows, so it does not require something as advanced as UAC.
However, there are also things Tiger does better: most importantly, Spotlight feels a lot faster than Vista’s instant search, even when comparing my aging Cube to that much faster laptop! Other than that, Flip3D is fairly useless compared to the utterly brilliant Expose (seriously. Thank you, Apple, for Expose).
Ubuntu 7.04 is an interesting competitor to Vista, especially because Ubuntu has an advantage Vista will never be able to fight: it is free. Free as in, you don’t have to pay EUR 500 for the full monty. This advantage alone justifies going with Ubuntu instead of Vista. As for the other features, Ubuntu can definitely be made on par with Vista, but sadly, it still requires some googling and handywork to get it that way. As an example, take the restricted drivers manager: it is a really nice utility, but nowhere does it warn the user that you actually need to manually activate the restricted repositories before this utility works. You can click the ‘activate’ button behind the Ati driver a million times, but it will not warn you that it will not work.
To me, the two biggest disadvantages to Vista are its price, and the many versions to choose from. Vista Ultimate is ridiculously expensive, especially when you take into account that while it has increased in out-of-the-box functionality over XP, it still is fairly meager compared to especially Linux distributions.
Conclusion
After 5 months of usage, the only conclusion I can draw is that Vista certainly is not as bad as many make it out to be. It has its faults, surely, but as long as you stick to switching to Vista when you want to replace your computer, there is little in the form of showstopper bugs.
The most interesting thing about using Vista on a day-to-day basis is the fact that you discover new features almost every day. A few weeks ago, I found out that Vista can actually resize its own system partition on the fly, without needing a reboot, in less than a minute’s time! After this, I could easily install Ubuntu 7.04 alongside of it. You discover these little touches very often, and that only confirms my feeling that Vista has indeed a whole lot more to offer than just a pretty face and UAC.
In other words, I stick by the conclusion presented in my previous review. “All in all, I am impressed by Windows Vista […]. Windows Vista is better than XP, and definitely more than just an improved look as many say.”
If you would like to see your thoughts or experiences with technology published, please consider writing an article for OSNews.
This quatation is the corner stone of the whole review, I think.
The only people that I know that critisize Vista to death are people who use open-source operating systems. My friends who used to be XP users are now happy Vista users and love it. My 2 friends who use Macs don’t find Vista “bad”, they just prefer their Macs, but to be fair, Vista is better than XP. Thank God, it’s better, after 5 years and billions of development, that would be sad!
No wonder, really, since they know better.
Aye; sheep are people who have only ever used Windows and think it the beat to march to. There’s nothing wrong with /liking/ Vista, on new machines it just works, but it’s still Windows to me.
Im happy dual boot XP and (quite happy) Ubuntu user (Im writing this from Ubuntu) and i call Vista a complete disaster (even worse than Windows ME) and best thing that happen to promote open source and Linux ever since its creation.
Not much can be worse than ME and Vista is certainly not worse than ME.
“Not much can be worse than ME and Vista is certainly not worse than ME.”
DRM/activation/WGA, pricing, EULA, and system requirements for Vista are worse than ME. Vista is a DOWNGRADE.
So those things you mentioned, in your opinion, make Vista a DOWNGRADE from ME?
All this talk about DRM actication and WGA…
I’m using Vista and I’ve NEVER have been limited by any form of DRM so far. I have no HDDVDs or BluRay movies though, so that’s why maybe.
WGA and activation? Activation takes like… 30 seconds after install, and you’re done. It’s gone. Never bothered me again.
System requirements are of course higher – no suprise here really, but my 3-year old Athlon64 (2GB of RAM and a gf7600 gt) system runs it flawlessly.
“I’m using Vista and I’ve NEVER have been limited by any form of DRM so far. I have no HDDVDs or BluRay movies though, so that’s why maybe.”
You are lucky…….so far.
“WGA and activation? Activation takes like… 30 seconds after install, and you’re done. It’s gone. Never bothered me again.”
MS will be “authenticating” the OS every month, just remember the computer belongs to MS, not you.
http://www.mypcpros.com/computer-blog/2007/5/1/microsofts-new-valid…
“System requirements are of course higher – no suprise here really, but my 3-year old Athlon64 (2GB of RAM and a gf7600 gt) system runs it flawlessly.”
The system requirements for Vista are absurd, but I guess that is what happens when a poorly made OS is loaded with DRM. Linux is a quality, secure, reliable, reasonably priced, DRM free OS with modest system requirements, you should try it.
Edited 2007-05-09 17:30
Linux huh? I thought we were discussing Windows differences but what the hell, a bit OT never hurt anybody.
Yeah, I use/administrate linux systems, gentoo specifically, everyday at work and I love it.
It’s great for servers (It’s the only system my company uses) and work-dekstop environment
On a HOME desktop though, I just want a multimedia workhorse, a “plug and play” system that I can run my games on, watch a movie and use a program or two without too much hassle. These tasks are still WAY less time consuming (and trouble free) on Windows. And on top of that I’m used to, and like, some of the Windows-only software I use daily. I just appreciate Windows for what it is – a great home system if you know how to set it up and maintain.
I’ve used Linux exclusively on my home desktop for 9 months just to see if I can switch completely… and it didn’t work out for me. Not for anything big, but I just got tired of those little annoyances, like software compilations failing or misbehaving graphics drivers… and lack of my favorite games (no, cedega doesn’t cut it – not even close).
I rather spend my free time doing things I like instead of fighting with the os to play that h264 encoded clip without eating all available cpu power or getting that latest and greatest 3d game to somehow work under wine.
@Ultimatebadass
I read your post twice. A properly configured gentoo box is a superior multimedia workforce than that of Vista.
I use Gentoo as my primary desktop so I am familiar with it. If compilation problems/misbehaving graphics cards are a problem to you. Why are you even attempting Gentoo?
“A properly configured gentoo box is a superior multimedia workforce than that of Vista.”
I wouldn’t say superior, maybe comparable and that only if you don’t put games into the equation. You can play movies and audio files on both – no big deal really, you can even use same libraries (ffdshow).
“I use Gentoo as my primary desktop so I am familiar with it. If compilation problems/misbehaving graphics cards are a problem to you. Why are you even attempting Gentoo?”
Don’t worry, I can handle myself These are problems because they waste my time – not because I can’t deal with them. As far as graphics issues go: I was using and ati card back then – with their ‘GREAT’ drivers you get about 40% performance (not to mention stability…) out of your gfx hardware. What’s the point in living with that then? Remember, were talking about an (mostly) entertainment machine.
What you said was untrue.
Gentoo provided a superior Multimedia experience the second it had a range of video and music players, rather than the *forced* default of WMP on Vista, and a better TV experience…and you only have to download a codec pack *once*, then its updated automatically with all my other packages.
Of course you know this.
With your reply you will also know that Gentoo is not about time, otherwise you would have chosen from one of those 100’s of binary distributions that are so popular. Its about a taylored Desktop experience; and stability for those who have the knowhow.
What is also interesting is we are talking about your ati graphics card. Could you please post the benchmark that shows its about 60% slower. The open source ones are slower, but I cannot believe you were running those as you clearly have no quarms about open source.
I hope your running windows becuase those games are running upto 40% slower on Vista.
I’m now openly calling you a liar.
Edited 2007-05-10 00:28
“Gentoo provided a superior Multimedia experience the second it had a range of video and music players, rather than the *forced* default of WMP on Vista, and a better TV experience…and you only have to download a codec pack *once*, then its updated automatically with all my other packages. ”
Well, first of all, noone forces you to use WMP on windows (though it’s a very nice app since the last version), you can install that “range of video and music players” on it too. And about codec packs: it’s not like downloading&installing CCCP or some other is an issue – after you do it you can play almos anything you throw at it in any player you choose.
TV experience? I have a tuner but I use it only for the s-video input, DScaler works great.
“With your reply you will also know that Gentoo is not about time, otherwise you would have chosen from one of those 100’s of binary distributions that are so popular. Its about a taylored Desktop experience; and stability for those who have the knowhow. ”
Well, heh I never said it was gentoo that I used at home – it was SuSE, still you HAVE to configure and compile some things by yourself (vlc for example) if you want specific options turned on or off. Or if you want the latest packages and don’t want to wait for rpm providers. I belive the “Desktop experience” is similar in both – they both can be configured to use whatever window manager and applications you like.
“What is also interesting is we are talking about your ati graphics card. Could you please post the benchmark that shows its about 60% slower. The open source ones are slower, but I cannot believe you were running those as you clearly have no quarms about open source. ”
Heh I can’t provide any benchmarks, what I said was based on my experience with linux versions of Quake 4 and Doom 3, my old ati9800, and ati’s linux drivers that were available when I used it. The usual experience was that at the beginning of the game it would run somewhat ok, but as you played it for a few minutes it would start to get VERY choppy, to the point of being unplayable. I tried it on the newest version of the driver I could get my hands on back then.
“I hope your running windows becuase those games are running upto 40% slower on Vista.”
Not the ones I play at least :/
“I’m now openly calling you a liar. ”
Let’s not turn this into another linux vs windows flame war. If it works for you – great, have fun using it, I’m trying to force anything on you. I’m only speaking from my own experience, which might be different from yours, but that doesn’t make me a liar.
All I’m saying was that I tried it, and was not satisfied, for various reasons it did not work for me. You don’t have to defend linux as I’m NOT attacking it, the original post I made in this discussion was about comparing ME to Vista, but, natrually for OSNews, someone had to throw that famous “use linux” into the thread…
I must have missed the news that Microsoft had agreed to make WMP optional on Vista. I’m absolutely sure they created something dodgy and gave it a dodgy name. Although I am glad that you are enjoying the software derived from Linux.
You used Suse, bless. If your trying to convince me you use Gentoo on servers and have problems compiling stuff, or it wouldn’t have been trivial to replace it with an alternative distribution. Or that their were many if *any* programs you needed to do this with, or you’d have chosen Gentoo. Clearly Suse was not known for being cutting edge. There are lots of Distributions that are. I cannot believe the *must have* feature was not in the multitude of other Media Players out there.
but the funny thing is you talk about back then. Am I comparing Linux to DOS or Windows 95 or Windows XP no I’m comparing a modern distribution to Vista. Why are you even posting *if* you used Linux for 9 months you would know *everything* changes. Thats 3 releases of the kernel for a start.
You have a ati9800 and your a *gamer* well I never. I’m sure your well aware how this could be replaced with a faster 100% working faster graphics card. Although I’m glad your games aren’t slower. That statement flies in the face of logic as *everything* is slower on Vista from networking to applications to graphics by a large benchmark, or not at all. You must be running Vista Fantasy edition.
This is not a windows linux flame war. There is some fantastic stuff in windows, and lots going for it. You have pointed out *none* of these, but instead descided to make stuff up about Linux as it was, and how Vista is today. I love a good flame war *you learn things* and are better of it afterwards. If you have to make things up, you either do not have the knowledge or there simply Vista has no strengths to argue on. If your going to make “ViZta Rulz” type comments rather that a real discussion, there are lots of websites for that sort of thing.
Ok, I’m going to sum up what I was writing about in the original post.
1. I have nothing against Linux. Probably contrary to what you believe, I like that OS. It has uses where Windows has got nothing on it, for example: were running voip PBX’s (gentoo and asterisk based) that handle really heavy trafic on p3-class systems.
2. Above it’s not really important as I’m talking purely about a HOME/ENTERTAINMENT computer. You know, the one you get back to after 8-10 hours at work.
3. It’s not about convincing you or anyone else that Windows is better than Linux for that use. I’m just expressing my own opinion and experiences in response to the original poster saying “use linux” in a “i’ve tried it, thanks but no thanks” manner.
4. FOR ME (<– that’s the critical part in case you miss it), Windows Vista is the better choice for a home computer. It runs all software that I need and it supports all hardware I have, if not to the fullest extent possible (for example sound blaster drivers still lack a few features), it’s still beter then what linux had for me last time I ckecked (I gave up on it right around when vista rtm came out). XP would be better than Vista, but I’ll admit – i’m a sucker for eye candy (please don’t start about Beryl, XGL and whatnot – they are great and I acknowledge that), and I’m sure hardware manufactures WILL get their asses in gear about polishing up those drivers (can’t say i’m equally sure about Linux, see, for example X-Fi case).
And that’s it. I’m not trying to convince you, or anyone, to abandon your os of choice, so stop acting like I am. None of the problems i’ve encountered with linux were showstoppers. I just pointed them out to explain my decission better – I just don’t want to deal with them on my home system. And that’s it.
Are you trying to convince me that I was wrong to choose Windows over Linux? Or maybe you’re trying to discredit everything i’ve said because someone might read it and suddenly become scared of Linux? What is there to be SO passionate about? Remember, it’s just software – it’s meant to accomplish a task, not to be fought over. I found you calling me a liar quite offensive and uncalled for.
“I must have missed the news (…) derived from Linux.”
Ok, so you don’t have a choice if it’s going to be installed or not. You don’t have to use it though, if you don’t like it – assing an alternate program to play your media files you won’t even know it’s there. I fail to see the problem here. What part of WMP11 is so dodgy? In 11 they’ve fixed it considerably, for example, the media library is one of the best I’ve seen in any app of this kind. Only Amarok can top it in my eyes.
but the funny thing is you talk about back then. (…) releases of the kernel for a start.
All the things I’ve said about windows apply to both Vista, and XP – an os more than 5 years old.
You have a ati9800 (…) running Vista Fantasy edition.
No, I don’t have that card anymore. It was a great piece of hardware though. Games i’ve played on Vista are Stalker and Falcon 4.0 – compared to windows xp on similar settings and latest drivers I haven’t noticed any considerable slowdown, if there is, it’s below 10% mark.
“If your going to make “ViZta Rulz” type comments rather that a real discussion, there are lots of websites for that sort of thing.”
Funny, to me it seems like the message you wan’t to communicate to anyone following this discussion is “LOOK OUT!!!11 WINDOWS FANBOY AHEAD! GRAB YOUR PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES! DEATH TO THE INFIDEL!!!”
BTW: I found your calling me a liar quite offensive and uncalled for.
I’m pretty sure I never said you had anything against linux. I’m currently using linux on my home/entertainment system.
The only response you could have made is 2 years ago I installed suse on my machine but due to compiler flags!? not being available on my Media player of choice, and the commercial ati drivers at the time were poor for playing native commercial games, and wine and derivatives wasn’t advanced/easily configurable to play the cutting edge proprietary windows games at the time.
Truth be known that response was a long time coming. Who the hell cares what Linux was like then. Linux constantly evolves what was true last week about Linux is probably not true this week. Thats what the original article was about. Your post an off-topic irrelevance. of exactly the type I descibed “ViZta Rulz”
In fact to be fair at best you can only compare XP to Vista, and then you can’t very well. So please don’t misguide others with out of date information and lies.
If you can show me a way to not call you a liar when you lie. I will do do willingly.
Agreed – i could have mentioned more clearly that that was some time ago (in 2006, from january to september) and things -could- be better now. It was not my intention to misguide anyone.
So, would you say that ATI provides drivers that are on par in terms of quality/performance to those on windows today? During the time I used linux on that system, they were getting better with each release but in such small steps that it was painful to watch.
I know nvidia linux drivers are and were better, my laptop has a 7300go and it works just fine with Gentoo (current kernel and drivers), not counting the odd black window issue I have with Beryl.
How about wine/cedega? Did they finally get shader 2.0/3.0 support?
As for the compiling issue, it was just an example – to show that, in contrast, I don’t have to deal with that on Windows at all.
It’s just as you say, what was true week ago might not be today, but since this story was about the past, in essence, at which point did I lie exactly? I didn’t make any of this stuff up, I admit I pulled the 40% gfx performance figure of the air but that’s more or less how it felt like back then.
Your information is out of date. Seriously rather posting lies; misconceptions; misrepresentations, or hunches.
Why don’t you find post real information.
If the topic is about Vista “5 months later” why can’t you talk about Suse 18 months later.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=681&num=3
Wine/Linux games run 33-40% faster than Vista.
Like I say you must be running Vista Fantasy edition
Edited 2007-05-10 21:57
Well, my Vista Fantasy edition runs Doom3 at 40fps+ (just checked it, with the in-game fps counter on) at 1024×768, High Quality settings with AAx4 turned on.
That’s a really interesting benchmark they did…
“With Windows Vista, the NVIDIA display driver used was version 100.65”
I have, at this moment, forceware version 158.18 installed on Vista…
Good now do a comparison. Otherwise all we can say right now is that under linux it would run 33-40% faster than Vista. So you should get 60+ fps which takes it into the playable region.
Here are some benchmarks of the 158 series forceware with Vista compared to previous releases and XP:
1. Hardware setup:
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_4.htm
2. Synthetic benchmark (3dmark 2005, SM 2.0/3.0):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_7.htm
3. Synthetic benchmark (3dmark 2006 SM 3.0):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_8.htm
4. Command & Conquer 3 (SM 3.0 game):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_9.htm
5. Company of Heroes (SM 3.0 game):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_10.htm
6. Far Cry (SM 2.0 game):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_11.htm
7. Splinter Cell Chaos Theory (SM 3.0 game):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_12.htm
8. Prey (SM 2.0, doom3 engine based game, so should also run on linux natively):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_13.htm
9. Quake4 (SM 2.0, also d3 engine based):
http://hardware.mydrivers.com/2/82/82490_14.htm
So, what we can see here is that most of the games benchmarked in fact run slower under Vista compared to XP, but, like I’ve said before the difference in MOST cases is around 10% – not a huge one, and you’d normaly expect that from a system that required a total re-write of graphics drivers. You can still play all those games just fine.
On Linux you can run a very select few of the opengl based games like quake or doom natively, and I belive that they run fine now, at least on nvidia hardware. They might even run better compared to vista since its opengl implementation is far from being perfect (it runs well enough though to be perfectly usable though).
I read they added support for shader model 2.0, and that is indeed a great achievement, but version 3.0 is now in widespread use and 4.0/directx 10 games will start to pop up soon. So in those games mentioned, even if they do run you’ll not be able to turn on all eye candy features. I couldn’t find any cedega 6 performance benchmarks other than that you posted (that shows performance on opengl games), so the questions remains open as to how well those games actualy run.
And there also comes an issue of sound. Do games run with cedega support any form of hardware audio acceleration/EAX extensions? Don’t think so.
“, after 5 years and billions of development, that would be sad!”
Only three years of work; they threw out all the work they did on the XP codebase and switched to Server 2003 SP1 in mid-2004 in the Vista reset. Miguel de Icaza said they threw out 60% of complete bad quality code they had written at that point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_Windows_Vista#Mid-2004_…
http://wsjclassroom.com/archive/06jan/bigb_microsoft.htm
Edited 2007-05-08 14:34
60 % != everything.
Therefore the development process took _more_ than 5 years. Add to that the fact several of the most advertised technologies didn’t make it into Vista (and most likely never will materialize) despite having been worked on for more than 15 years.
If you take a look at the wikipedia article you linked to you’ll see this statement: “Successive internal builds over several months gradually integrated a lot of the fundamental work that had been done over the previous three years, but with much stricter rules about what code could be brought into the main builds.”
Therefore. More than 5 years of development (6 years actually not counting parts in development since before 1990 and yet to materialize).
C’mon, Like there’s no bad code in open source. There are tons. Everywhere.
Or you checkout the sources of every oos you use? And peer review them? Sun’s OpenOffice as well I guess
What you report at least shows that time has been used productively. I prefer one feature taken out, than a broken one…
Edit: fixed typo
Edited 2007-05-09 00:24
Haha, well we don’t know what the quality of code in Vista is like, now do we, since it’s closed source!
I haven’t written ANYTHING about quality of code. Of course there is bad code in FLOSS. Some of it is horrible though I’ve seen some beauties as well (but some code has been horrible to look at… my eyes my eyes).
I merely responded to a poster incorrectly claiming that Vista hadn’t been in development for more than 3 years. This is incorrect. It’s been in development for more than 6 years. That’s all I wrote. I never wrote anything about FLOSS being better. I only wrote Vista had been in development for more than the incorrectly claimed 3 years.
How you managed to turn that into a claim that FLOSS is alwaya better is a mystery to me. I wrote no such thing.
>>The only people that I know that critisize Vista to death are people who use open-source operating systems.<<
Not me. I know people who have used microsoft exclusively for the last 20 years, and they *hate* Vista.
Major complaints: too much obtrusive drm, doesn’t burn dvds correctly, lacks essential drivers, and is too slow.
I don’t know anybody who actually likes Vista. Most people I know just see no reason for it.
Major complaints: too much obtrusive drm,
What? How exactly DRM is obtrusive in Vista?
“What? How exactly DRM is obtrusive in Vista?”
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
“What? How exactly DRM is obtrusive in Vista?”