Testers see Windows XP passing Vista

Have you tried the free replacement called "Open Office"? M$ just wants too much bloody money for its office suite and Open Office is a great FREE replacement for M$ office users. It can open pretty much any document M$ can and you cant beat the price (and I actually like the Graphical User Interface (GUI) better). They went with the KISS method (keep it simple stupid) which I'm a big fan of.

Office '07 has got to be the ugliest GUI I've seen from M$ to date. I've been using their products for many many years and Office '07 is not intuitive, I had to guess what button was what the first few times I tried it (kinda cartoonish looking)....bleh I'll pass.

-Reby

 

I'm still using MS Office 2003 and I've never paid for any MS Office suite and don't plan on it any time in the near future I hate MS Office 2007 - everything is so tiny, it's hard on the eyes and it's very hard to get used to. It's great for brand new Office users but really annoying for those of us who are already used to MS Office.

I looked into Open Office but it's yet another program to get used to so I'm just sticking with MS Office 2003. My work requires documents to be in .doc format so...

 

Okay something people don't understand is Vista is hardware dependent...
Let me explain a little
I am going to use the graphic side but also can be translated to other functions as well...
okay lets say you have a animated picture of a nice a nice lake with the waves moving across it... Under XP it has a limit of how many waves it could have across the lake then you would just see a repeat of that wave... another example would be trees you would just see a repeat of trees and their movement.... this is a program or software limit.....

Now under Vista there is no "program" barrier far as a "number" that could be shown but rather a CPU limit... Another words it is how fast the CPU can run will determine the number of waves or trees and there movement before you will see a repeat...
This is a hardware limit....

Now in order to run as such Vista really needs multiple cores (CPU, core 2, X2) so it can assign a single core to certain function..

Now Vista also needs at east 2G of ram to run well.. it will run okay with 1G but I would say that should be the min but really needs 2G...
If you have bought a computer with Vista that has 512 you got riped off and probaly will have issues...

Why? well other then L1 and L2 (basically ram right on the cpu itself) Vista puts allot of its data into ram so it can be accessed quickly....

Vista is still a little ahead of its time and was made for "upcoming hardware"

as faster hardware is releases Vista will get faster where XP will still have program limits where Vista will be able to take full advantage of the hardware new speed....


There is Ram in the works right now made by IBM that is 10X faster then any current ram and uses 1/2 the power as well... when products are released like this XP will definitely lose to Vista in performance...

Vista is a resource hog because it is hardware dependent.. 2G ram, dual core you will be happy.... Now keep in mind it is a new OS and does have different operations..... That would involve "change" something we humans don't enjoy...

http://www.gamespot.com/video/0/6146095/

 

Yup, I have a dual core laptop and 2 gigs of ram and have no large issues with Vista. It is slower than XP in some places but it's also highly reliable.

IMO, Microsoft is just crucifying itself by letting Vista be sold in computers WITHOUT dual core and WITHOUT 2 gigs of ram. It just makes people hate Vista.

 

Yes. Absolutely. Didn't know a thing about computers so I decided to build one this year to fix my technology deficiency. Bought parts on line (Newegg is a great place to buy from) and proceeded to put together a 64 bit Vista machine. Between my ignorance, problems with vista, and 64 bit incompatabilities, I've had a hell of a time. Shouldn't complain too much though since I'm using it now. If you build your own machine, make sure you know the difference between "vista compatible" and "vista ready" when deciding on a motherboard. For all you geeks, here's what I put together:
Case Antec Sonata II (black is beautiful), Motherboard Asus M2N Plus SLI (vista ready but should have got vista compatible, won't choose Asus if I ever build another computer because even their tech support couldn't figure out the memory problem), Memory Geil 4x1GB (MB only installs 2GB which is either a 64 bit problem or a vista problem), CPU AMD athlon 5200+,Graphics Sapphire X1650PRO, KB&Mouse Microsoft ergonomic optical (nice and cheap, a good combo, but should have gone cordless), Optical Drive Lite On dvd burn, Hard Drive Samsung 500GB (no problems), Speakers Logitech X530 5.1 (should have gone 2.1 instead of 5.1 because 2.1 is plenty of sound. Also should have bought a sound card because onboard sound crackles online and only works 2.1 because, once again, MB or 64 bit is not compatible---Creative makes a 64 bit 5.1 card), Floppy Dr Teac (thought it obsolete but was so cheap I bought one anyway, and whaddaya know, I ended up needing it), Modem card generic (yes, sad but true, I have dial up), Monitor 19 in widescreen generic, Operating System Vista Ultimate (should have installed the 32 bit version).

 

I hate to say it but I got the Blue Screen Of Death TWICE today.....once this morning and once late this afternoon. If it does it again, I am dumping Vista once and for all.

 

FYI, you can't use NewEgg if you're a Canadian

I have an Asus system I put together myself but not for Vista. I love Asus for many reasons and use the onboard sound without issues on that computer (we have four computers in this house!!)

For my Vista setup, I have 2.0 GB of RAM (Vista only uses 2 gigs of ram, it won't use all four - there's a gazillion posts about this stuff in tech forums)(supposedly it's better to use 2 gigs x 2 instead of 1 gig x 4 but I can't remember why), onboard sound and video which works perfectly with my surround sound speaker setup. Of course, it's a laptop so it's a different ballgame. It's only a 1.66 GHz system but it runs quickly and well so far - I've been using Vista Ultimate now for almost six months.

I don't have a floppy in any of my computers any more but I do have USB cards/sticks etc so I use them instead.

Yeah, I'm a geek

 

Switch to 32 and you'll be fine. I have only gotten it twice in six months and it was my fault.

 

I thought the system deletes the other version upon initial startup?

 

Could be. I don't know. Sorry, can't help you there.