Should I upgrade to Vista?

[Chairman Meow]

Well, I'm going to be dual booting for the next few months till Vista gets up to scratch, then, inevitably I'll be using Vista exclusively. Just like the majority of you will given time.

And how would a non-techy person do this dual-booting thing of which you speak? Cos I want the shiny gubbins, but I don't want to lose my toys in the transition period.

 

[dogmatique]

Lean on the $ button and hope for the best.

 

[fishfinger]

I want the shiny gubbins,

You might not get the shiny gubbins in Vista.

You describe your laptop as "Vista Capable". This means that you will be able to run Vista, but you may not get the shiny new interface. In order to run Aero (the shiny new interface), your pc should be described as "Vista Premium Ready".

Even if your machine is capable of running Aero, you may find that your laptop needs to be recharged more often - as your graphics card will be operating in "3D mode", which drains more power, than normal "2D mode".

 

[mhendo]

The suggestion to fire up a liveCD and take things from there is a very good one. It would be a Good Idea to use a machine with scads of RAM, as running off a CD can be *very* slow.

I downloaded the Ubuntu CD and had a bit of a play around with it. Basic stuff like web browsing and OpenOffice worked fine. It only worked on one of my monitors--the other one had a bunch of flickering colours--but i assume that can be fixed by downloading the appropriate drivers for my video card (GeForce 5200).

Now my challenge/request for you Linux users--help me get started.

 

[ska invita]

some fears surrounding Vista and its Data Mangement stuff 0- particularly for thoe who use their PC for audio:
http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?newsid=7675

 

[Jonti]

Vista is going to use very much more of a PC's resources than previous versions of Windows and degrade multi-media playback quality unless the user has purchased premium content from a Microsoft-approved resource.

But hey, it's shiny!

 

[editor]

But hey, it's shiny!

It surely is. Did you know your computer would go faster if you got rid of all the graphics too?

Some people like things shiny. And some people aren't bothered about squeezing the last ounce of performance out of a machine that it already quite probably gloriously overpowered for the job.

 

[han]

Thing is, if XP does what I want it to do, runs the programs what I want and al the peripherals work just fine, what's the point of me fannying about with another system?

Totally agree with that.

If what you've got works, just leave it! I think that should be the I.T. person's mantra!

I wouldn't go near Vista until a couple of service packs have come out, so at least a year.

XP is pretty stable, so why bother?

 

[jæd]

It surely is. Did you know your computer would go faster if you got rid of all the graphics too?

Some people like things shiny. And some people aren't bothered about squeezing the last ounce of performance out of a machine that it already quite probably gloriously overpowered for the job.

Then why upgrade...? Seems people are just upgrading because it *is* shiny, rather than for any actual reason...

 

[editor]

Then why upgrade...? Seems people are just upgrading because it *is* shiny, rather than for any actual reason...

For some people, a more attractive interface is ample reason for an upgrade - it if makes their day go by better, why not? - although Vista does offer some useful upgrades.

 

[Negativland]

At the risk of being contentious... does anyone else thing the Vista interface looks really tacky?

 

[Jonti]

Nooooo! It's shiny

My precioussss, poisssonoussss, sshhhhiiiiiinee!!!

 

[jæd]

For some people, a more attractive interface is ample reason for an upgrade - it if makes their day go by better, why not? - although Vista does offer some useful upgrades.

Go on then, name 5...? Off the top-of-your head...

 

[ICB]

We're due a major hardware refresh at work in November but I may well delay it as I really don't want to get bogged down in a massive round of user training precipitated by Vista and Office 07.

I'm with mhendo and the editor on this, I think the difference between Linux advocates and everyone else is a focus on the means as an end in itself rather than computing as a practical tool. Don't get me wrong, we run quite a few Linux boxes and they're doing a handsome job as web servers, proxies, etc. but there was an experiment here a few years back to run eveything on Linux including the desktops and office apps and it was a disaster. If I proposed going back to that now I get lynched by the users just for suggesting it, and I can understand why.

 

[Jonti]

How practical is it to have to pay MS to allow your own HD content to be displayed on your own kit?

 

[editor]

Go on then, name 5...? Off the top-of-your head...

Off the top of my head:

1 Infinitely better searching
2. Breadcrumb navigation in folder view
3 Sidebar widgets. I like the look of them
4 Improved interface. Sure looks mighty purdy to me and I like purdy things
5 Massively updated Explorer file manager using metadata

 

[jæd]

I'm with mhendo and the editor on this, I think the difference between Linux advocates and everyone else is a focus on the means as an end in itself rather than computing as a practical tool.

Strange... I see that as the argument for Xp... Its not 99.99% reliable*, so I tend to assume people want to use it for its own sake, rather than any rational reasoning for it.

The same with Vista... And thats not even with the DRM argument...!

But its like ice-cream... No point me trying to change what flavour you like, but just remember there's other ones out there that might be tasty...!

* No computer is 100% reliable.

 

[editor]

At the risk of being contentious... does anyone else thing the Vista interface looks really tacky?

I like it, but it's not for everyone, of course. I don't like the ludicrous animated cartoon icon bar that sits at the bottom of Macs for example, but some people think it's way cool.

Happily, you can turn on and off what you like on both platforms, so the consumer can get the interface that pleases them.

 

[jæd]

Off the top of my head:

1 Infinitely better searching
2. Breadcrumb navigation in folder view
3 Sidebar widgets. I like the look of them
4 Improved interface. Sure looks mighty purdy to me and I like purdy things
5 Massively updated Explorer file manager using metadata

So nothing about increased security...? And isn't the DRM a major bonus...?

 

[editor]

So nothing about increased security...? And isn't the DRM a major bonus...? :

You asked me for five useful upgrades off the top of my head, and that's exactly what I gave you.

 

[ICB]

Strange... I see that as the argument for Xp... Its not 99.99% reliable*, so I tend to assume people want to use it for its own sake, rather than any rational reasoning for it.

Yeah but you would cos you're a classic example of the mentality

The argument for XP (and MS Office) is that all the non-geeks stand a better chance of using it than anything else as they will have got it when they bought their home PC, will have been trained on it in their last job, etc. etc. etc.

Trying to implement a non-MS end-user platform as an IT manager is a total non-starter, unless you're talking your oldskool terminal computing of course. You'd have the same difficulty trying to get a designer to use OSS products rather than Adobe, Quark, etc. It's about what's most practical and cost-effective not what's most elegantly coded or ethically righteous.

 

[Iam]

For some people, a more attractive interface is ample reason for an upgrade - it if makes their day go by better, why not?

To avoid people pointing and laughing and saying "told you so" when it all falls over and no one can help you?



But, y'know, not my computer....

 

[jæd]

You asked me for five useful upgrades off the top of my head, and that's exactly what I gave you.

So you don't think having a secure o/s is useful...? If I were on Xp it would be the main reason I would be upgrading...?

 

[editor]

So you don't think having a secure o/s is useful...?

Err, where have I expressed that opinion? But I've found XP to be very secure indeed, thanks.

If I were on Xp it would be the main reason I would be upgrading...?

You're not on XP and you're only here to score points and indulge in OS-bashing and it's very, very, very boring, you know.

 

[jæd]

Err, where have I expressed that opinion? But I've found XP to be very secure indeed, thanks.

You're not on XP and you're only here to score points and indulge in OS-bashing and it's very, very, very boring, you know.

So... Pointing out well-known flaws is "bashing". Just as pointing out alternatives is "preaching"...? And I do deal with Xp on a daily basis. While I use Linux, etc, most people at work don't. And I have to support a system that is sometimes deployed on Xp servers. (Give you three guesses which (statistically) we spend more time troubleshooting...?)

And that doesn't include mucking out people's laptops/desktop because they've got yet another virus/malware infestation...

 

[Dask]

Just installed a machine in the office with Vista.

First impressions: Pretty poor, still looks and feels like Windows 95 to me but with loads of fresh tack bolted onto the side of it.

 

[editor]

So... Pointing out well-known flaws is "bashing". Just as pointing out alternatives is "preaching"...?

Your last few exchanges with me in this thread tell me all I need to know about your intentions.

You asked me for five Vista upgrades off the top of my head. I gave you five. And then you started trying to put words in my mouth. B-ooor-ing!

 

[jæd]

Your last few exchanges with me in this thread tell me all I need to know about your intentions.

You asked me for five Vista upgrades off the top of my head. I gave you five. And then you started trying to put words in my mouth. B-ooor-ing!

<Yawn> <Unsubscribes-as-discussion-has-descended-into-name-calling>

 

[Fez909]

Err, where have I expressed that opinion? But I've found XP to be very secure indeed, thanks.

Not sure how you can claim this, to be honest. XP has needed two major upgrades since its release, as well as the constant stream of patches. And even with all the patches and both service packs, you still need to have anti-virus and a firewall, and most likely some kind of ad-remover and a spy-ware remover.

And then you could still get a trojan.

I use XP and I rarely get problems, but I'm under no illusion that that is because of the steps I have taken to ensure this, rather than the security of XP.

 

[editor]

Not sure how you can claim this, to be honest.

I meant that so long as you avail yourself of the ample free software packages available, there's no reason why an XP powered machine can't be secure.