Reply With QuoteWell I am overdue a new system and have been putting off until the Vista release.However I think I'll wait a while longer and see what bugs turn up. Not easy mind you given the power and capacity to be had for a relatively small outlay.
So, with M$'s new operating system becoming available today, hands up who is thinking of upgrading? I like the idea of 3D rendering, translucent dialogue boxes, funky colours etc etcbut is it really worth? Bearing mind that most of us, the regular users, will have to either buy add ons or buy an entirely new system that can support the Vista.
And is it me or does Vista look very similar to the Apple interface(s). Makes some sense if you think that Macs now run on Intel based pcs and can boot in either operating system.
I particularly like this quote from today's Guardian:
The Green Party yesterday claimed that the combination of new hardware and "paranoid" software restrictions would afflict users and the environment.
"There will be thousands of tonnes of dumped monitors, video cards and whole computers," said Sian Berry, the Green Party's principal speaker. "Future archaeologists will be able to identify a Vista upgrade layer when they go through our landfill sites.
full article here
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/new...001815,00.html
And according to the article above, there are already warnings for viruses etc.
VA
Well I am overdue a new system and have been putting off until the Vista release.However I think I'll wait a while longer and see what bugs turn up. Not easy mind you given the power and capacity to be had for a relatively small outlay.
F.T.F.A.
I'll be getting a new PC at work with Vista on. This is so I can support our software on Vista.
Isn't the main move re Vista to go for a modularized, rented OS? E.g., you can get the basic system rather cheaply, but you have to pay rent for extra modules. And if you stop paying the rent, the additional modules stop working. (A move to make computers less standalone.)
So, for example, you get small letters as part of the basic system, but, if you want capitals and punctuation, you have to pay extra. This would explain the phenomenon one has seen recently of people using just small letters, and no punctuation. They aren't renting the additional modules. (Occasionally, you see it the other way around, as well: someone has bought the version with all caps.)
Another example. You might want to run more than one process at a time. To do so, you have to rent the module for this.
Sounds like a fabulous deal. (Or, have I been taken in by the scare mongers and nay sayers. ;))
Best wishes,
Bob
I still regard XP as new! :?
Seriously, when about to buy a new computer recently I did consider holding off until the new OS was out, but decided Vista vs XP was a minor factor in my choice.
I just bought my Wife a new PC for christmas and it comes with a Vista upgrade. I expect the disc to arrive any day now. I won't install it for about 6 months or so let others have the teething pains.
Looks fairly swishy, but it needs 512MB of RAM to work, and recommends 1GB! :shock: Also, what's with a pricing policy that has the upgrade as $100 in the US and £100 in the UK?
Dave E
Skating away on the thin ice of a new day
It's called 'Rip-off Britain'. We're used to it over here and do bugger all about it except moan. :roll: :cry: :cry:Originally Posted by Dave E
A German friend once said "You English are a strange race. Someone kicks you in the balls, so you roll around on the floor moaning for a while. Then, when the pain has subsided, you open your legs wide so they can do it to you again!". :evil:
One day we'll learn that all we have to do is stop buying things we're blatently overcharged for. Maybe that one day will come when we join the euro and it becomes blindingly obvious. :twisted:
Best Regards - Peter
I'd hate to be with you when you're on your own.
I have been running the Release Candidate 2 (I think) version since about November on a spare machine. It looks pretty, and has some new features but I have to say I think it's all window dressing.
There is nothing really new going on in my opinion and I find all the glassy 3D crap just gets in the way of what I'm trying to do.
The pricing policy just stinks! Without the bells and whistles, it really isn't worth the trouble and you have to pay extra for the bells and whistles.
I'm underwhelmed. Still nowhere near Apple's design simplicity and I'm sticking to Linux.
Say no more...
The secret words are OEM and Academic. OEM Home Premium is available for £70ish at the usual online stores and Academic is the same price on Oboy
Viruses
Intruders
Spyware
Trojans and
Adware
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
So true!
People, get a Mac with bootcamp and most of your sorrows will be gone within minutes ;-)
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
Now joining the Euro would be something for which we would be blatently overcharged. <ducks>
Best wishes,
Bob
I just ordered a new PC with Vista on for myself at work. Since we are software developers we need to have a PC with Vista on in case one of our clients has it and finds a problem. It happens that I was due a PC upgrade anyway as my current one is 3 years old.
Having started this thread I should add that I' m thinking of buying a new laptop in the next few months (maybe) and I find myself drawn to the other side, Macbooks etc.
Hmmmm and with all this Vista transition I' m really considering making the leap to the Mac.
VA
Do it! I've moved from PC to Mac for my business...you won't regret it
:)
Alan
As you know, that sorts out most of your probs... you can still run vista or xp on your mac without any troubles...
...but you won´t do it ;-)
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
Possibly not. I haven't crystallised a decision yet on the subject of making the move to Macs. Its on the table though for the near future. I will certainly enquire more when that time comes closer.As you know, that sorts out most of your probs... you can still run vista or xp on your mac without any troubles...
...but you won´t do it ;-)
:)
VA
Another option is this:
http://www.codeweavers.com
They produce software that allows Windows apps to run on Intel-based Macs running OSX.
The joy of this approach is that you don't need to shell out on a copy of Windows to run the apps.
No need to sully your Macintosh with the bloated monster that is Windows.
I think if you are using a PC for graphics/photography the Mac probably rules.
I,ve just had a go on the new Vista and must say it was a very cool looking operating system. I loved the design and layout and looks very user friendly. Given the choice I would use Vista after using both systems.
8)
Rod
Best so far still is parallels ;-)
http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
I use the codeweavers to run a windows program on linux.Best so far still is parallels ;-)
http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/
Is parallels a implementation of the libraries, etc., or a virtual machine? If a virtual machine, you need a windows license. For the codeweavers (Crossover) you don't.
Best wishes,
Bob
Most (if not all) of the popular graphic design and photo manipulation software is available for both platforms, so it's not just the software choice. What makes the Macintosh the machine of choice of the design community is the fact that it's just so reliable.
I couldn't run my studio with Windows-based PCs as I couldn't afford the downtime or ridiculous support costs. In seventeen years of Macintosh ownership I've never had data-destroying hardware or software issues. How many Windows users can say that?
In contrast - my wife's business has to use Windows-based computers as the accounting software they use is Windows-only. She frequently curses the day Bill Gates was born. Her overpaid IT consultant would disagree, however.
Vista is very pretty if you like that sort of thing, it should be given the humungous development time. They've had many years to err... 'borrow' from the Mac OS. I personally don't believe in buying Operating Systems because of their looks. Transparent flying windows are meaningless when the thing is ridden with viruses and spyware. I'm also not sure if the whizzy stuff exists for the basic version. You pay extra for that apparently.
Where the Macintosh OS wins out is in sheer stability of the Unix-based OS. It just works. And it just keeps working. No viruses, no spyware. No nonsense.
I was interested to see that over 50% of Macintosh sales in the last quarter were to people who had previously been Windows users.
Hmmm...
It's a pity that Stevie Jobs won't unleash OSX into the open so we can all have a go without having to buy a new machine.
Of course you are right Bob. Parallels is pretty much like a Virtual Machine and sure needs a licence.I use the codeweavers to run a windows program on linux.Best so far still is parallels ;-)
http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/
Is parallels a implementation of the libraries, etc., or a virtual machine? If a virtual machine, you need a windows license. For the codeweavers (Crossover) you don't.
Best wishes,
Bob
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
Er, no. The idea that if you are a designer and need good graphics capabilities on your machine and therefore you need a Mac, went out the window(sic) around 1995.
People buy Macs for completely different reasons now. Apple realise this and market their products accordingly.
Why are there no viruses (?? virae) for the Mac OS?
Is it just because everyone hates Bill?
Good question.
I think that a combination of inherent security problems with apps like Outlook and the large installed user base has made Windows attractive to the morons that write these things. Even virus hoaxes cause a reasonable amount of panic.
There certainly used to be viruses for the Macintosh, but this was around the late 80s/early 90s when the OS was radically different and computers weren't as 'connected' as they are now.
It is more difficult to write viruses for operating systems and programs where there is a sharp difference between data and program.
For example, if you use a text editor that takes what it is presented with as text (as VIM does, which I use), you get that clean separation between the program and the data for the program. If you use a word processor that blurs the distinction between the document being edited and the program being run (various sorts of scripting) you have a greater chance of some nasty affecting your system.
Similarly for browsers. If it renders html that's one thing, but if it also runs stuff (active scripting?) that's another.
Also, look at a dump of a network when a windows box is plugged in, or at least old windows. They "explore" "the neighborhood", letting everyone know they are there, and seeing who else is around.
Best wishes,
Bob
Because it´s not economic. There are still bout 90% Windows users out there...
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
This is an interesting and somewhat disturbing article on the DRM and snooping abilities of Vista.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6319845.stm
:? :? :evil: :evil: :roll: :roll:
Think I'll give it a miss for a while.......
Had Vista on a PC on my desk now for a month or so (my place of work is on the TAP RD program) and first got my hands on it early last year at Microsoft in Reading (sadly missed out on the Seattle trip - only 3 from our place went - damn it!).
It is VERY stable I've had NO blue screens, errors or wobbles of any kind - most impressive for a Microsoft 1st release.
We've also had 60 machines in a public area with Vista installed for a few weeks for students/staff to try out. With over 4000 logins the comments coming back have been very positive.
Our biggest headaches are deployment and training - particularly with the new version of Office (which is massively different from the old one in terms of look and feel).
If you have a PC that can handle Vista "properly" I would recommend it as a work machine. Currently lots of games are "broken" or slow until the programmers get their acts in gear sorting out drivers and compatibility issues.
Machine spec that I would recommend for the full Vista experience....
Get a decently fast processor (go Core2Duo if you can) LOTS of RAM (and I mean starting at 1Gb - I've got 2Gb) and preferably a 256Mb (or upwards) fast graphics card.
Sounds expensive? At the moment we're paying about £600 - £700 all in (complete with 17" LCD monitor) for these from Dell - so not too bad.
It's kind of a shame that these upgrades are needed periodically - but it keeps me in a job and keeps life fun :)
Cheers,
Windows, LOL.
Seamaster73 Wrote:
My home PC is almost exclusively used for gaming and, as such, another operating system/platform (e.g. OS-X/Mac) would be almost useless.Windows, LOL
In terms of real world driver issues (not games related) I have currently had NO compatibility issues with Vista, in fact it has included drivers that surprised me (obscure Photocopier printers, for example).
Latest news re: "broken games" is that this statement was made by "WildTangent" a well known web based games (and spyware) supplier. In fact only about 5 in 100 web based games are "broken" and most other "installed" games are working OK (if a little slower - due to the additional overheads imposed by the new OS).
I will probably be moving to Vista at some point in the near future on my home PC - but will be waiting until I "need to".
However, as I stated, work wise it is more secure, more stable, better looking, more intuitive and has a much greater feature set than the previous version.
Not as "arty farty" as your Mac but it's horses for courses. I'm (sadly) a die hard PC man - thanks mainly to a lifetime in IT - and, as such am unlikely to ever swap to "the other side". I support Macs as well but they just don't do what we need them to do (in the main) at work.
Cheers,
I wonder how stable OSX would be if it had to run on as wide a variety of machines as Windows does?
As a matter of interest what do you perceive to be "arty farty" about the Macintosh?
Hello I'm a Mac!
Cheers,
Tim.
:D Good one!
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
They are very stylish, and sold on those grounds. (No grey box there.) They are favorites of graphic arts types. The Mackintosh "experience" is important.As a matter of interest what do you perceive to be "arty farty" about the Macintosh?
I've not been keen on them because they are closed systems, not easy to extend, and don't allow one to use commodity hardware. (At least this was so in the past.) Being mean, I never buy a new system, I just upgrade the bits I need to. In fact, I'm still using P3 processors (dual 1GHz).
Nor do I like the idea that one can't use a command line interface with a powerful scripting shell (which is faster and more powerful for many operations).
Best wishes,
Bob
I thought you could use a CLI with OSX? Apart from that, you can't have them sitting on your desk with half the innards hanging out so they can't be REAL computers :DThey are very stylish, and sold on those grounds. (No grey box there.) They are favorites of graphic arts types. The Mackintosh "experience" is important.As a matter of interest what do you perceive to be "arty farty" about the Macintosh?
I've not been keen on them because they are closed systems, not easy to extend, and don't allow one to use commodity hardware. (At least this was so in the past.) Being mean, I never buy a new system, I just upgrade the bits I need to. In fact, I'm still using P3 processors (dual 1GHz).
Nor do I like the idea that one can't use a command line interface with a powerful scripting shell (which is faster and more powerful for many operations).
Best wishes,
Bob
Perhaps you can. This would be a good thing.
Best wishes,
Bob
PS One of the things I would difficult to give up on my current system is being able to have multiple desktops. Mail, web, editing, and misc, each have their own desktop. :)
RLF
They are very stylish, and sold on those grounds. (No grey box there.) They are favorites of graphic arts types. The Mackintosh "experience" is important.As a matter of interest what do you perceive to be "arty farty" about the Macintosh?
I've not been keen on them because they are closed systems, not easy to extend, and don't allow one to use commodity hardware. (At least this was so in the past.) Being mean, I never buy a new system, I just upgrade the bits I need to. In fact, I'm still using P3 processors (dual 1GHz).
Nor do I like the idea that one can't use a command line interface with a powerful scripting shell (which is faster and more powerful for many operations).
Best wishes,
Bob
Granted, the civillian Macintoshes such as the iMac or Mac Mini are aimed at a more style-led consumer that see it as a lifestyle accessory to go with their iPod. Nothing wrong with that, a lot of people don't want to or don't feel comfortable dicking about with the guts of their machine.
The Pro range (which I use) are beautifully engineered, reasonably expandable and pretty bomb-proof in their construction.
I am a 'graphic art type' but I'm also a businessman. I couldn't do what I do on a Windows-based PC - just too unreliable and too much downtime. My decision to use Macintosh was down to cold hard logic and similar meanness rather than a fuzzy and misplaced idea of it being stylish. If a nondescript grey box would do the job as well, I'd have the grey box.
Expandability and commodity hardware? - surely with the decreased cost of computing, it's cheaper to buy a new machine than it is to upgrade? - this is true of all computers, not just Apple machines.
As an example - my wife is looking to update her Sony VAIO laptop she bought six years ago - no upgrade path for the processor - no way of adding more RAM, it's at it's limit of 256mb, which was considered state-of-the-art then, but just won't cut it with Vista now. Any additional money wasted on upgrading it would be better spent on buying a new machine that would cost a fraction of the 2k she paid for it.
No Command line interface/ scripting?
Not true. Following quotes from the Apple Website.
"Command-line Environment
UNIX users will feel at home in Darwin, the robust BSD environment that underlies Mac OS X. That environment is accessible at any time from the Terminal application."
Scripting?
"All of the standard UNIX utilities and scripting languages are included in Mac OS X: editors such as emacs, vim and even ed; file management tools such as cp, mv, ls and tar; shell scripts including bash (the default shell), tcsh (csh) and zsh. Tiger adds the korn shell so you can run scripts written for other operating systems more easily. And of course you can use scripting languages such as Perl, PHP, tcl, Ruby and Python, with native support for the popular Tcl/TK, TKInter and WxWidgets toolkits. Python users can also script the powerful Quartz compositing engine. Visit the Open Source page for more Open Source utilities in Mac OS X."
Command line Interfacy and scripty enough?
They are very stylish, and sold on those grounds. (No grey box there.) They are favorites of graphic arts types. The Mackintosh "experience" is important.As a matter of interest what do you perceive to be "arty farty" about the Macintosh?
I've not been keen on them because they are closed systems, not easy to extend, and don't allow one to use commodity hardware. (At least this was so in the past.) Being mean, I never buy a new system, I just upgrade the bits I need to. In fact, I'm still using P3 processors (dual 1GHz).
Nor do I like the idea that one can't use a command line interface with a powerful scripting shell (which is faster and more powerful for many operations).
Best wishes,
Bob
Granted, the civillian Macintoshes such as the iMac or Mac Mini are aimed at a more style-led consumer that see it as a lifestyle accessory to go with their iPod. Nothing wrong with that, a lot of people don't want to or don't feel comfortable dicking about with the guts of their machine.
The Pro range (which I use) are beautifully engineered, reasonably expandable and pretty bomb-proof in their construction.
I am a 'graphic art type' but I'm also a businessman. I couldn't do what I do on a Windows-based PC - just too unreliable and too much downtime. My decision to use Macintosh was down to cold hard logic and similar meanness rather than a fuzzy and misplaced idea of it being stylish. If a nondescript grey box would do the job as well, I'd have the grey box.
Expandability and commodity hardware? - surely with the decreased cost of computing, it's cheaper to buy a new machine than it is to upgrade? - this is true of all computers, not just Apple machines.
As an example - my wife is looking to update her Sony VAIO laptop she bought six years ago - no upgrade path for the processor - no way of adding more RAM, it's at it's limit of 256mb, which was considered state-of-the-art then, but just won't cut it with Vista now. Any additional money wasted on upgrading it would be better spent on buying a new machine that would cost a fraction of the 2k she paid for it.
There's nothing inherently unreliable about a Windows machine. I used to look after NT servers that ran for 12-18 months without a reboot in an industrial environment. XP is much more stable than NT ever was.
Using a laptop as an example is very misleading. Is it possible to run OSX on a six year old Apple laptop?
Yes, as it happens, it's entirely possible to run OSX on a six year old Apple laptop. I'm even running it on a 10 year old G3 Desktop I use as a print server.
(walks slowly and quietly away from the thread, whistling in a nervous way)....
Yes.
I agree that now Apple has found the Unix way, things are better. About 10 years too late, of course. But better late than never, I think. Still too much junk on top, but better.
Buying a new system is seldom cheaper than upgrading, although no doubt, there are cases where it is, especially with laptops. (A good rhetorical move to use the special case of laptops in an attempt to support the more general conclusion. ;)) But I was concentrating on non-laptops.
I probably spend £200 every 2-3 years to upgrade things, usually with 2nd hand bits. (I don't mind not being on the cutting edge.) The old bits from the server go into my home box. The bits from the home box go into emergency parts storage. The old emergency parts get binned. I've been doing it this way for a long time now, at a reasonably low cost.
The costly upgrades are when changing the MB, which, because of tie-in, requires new CPU and new RAM. I wish these components were on a standard backplane.
Best wishes,
Bob
Hi Bob
To be fair to Apple, they've had a version of Unix (A/UX) running on their machines since 1988. Admittedly, it wasn't very popular, but it was available. I never used it, so I don't know how spartan it was.
I concede that the example of the VAIO laptop wasn't the best one I could have chosen, but it annoys me that the idiots that brought it to market thought that 256mb of RAM would be sufficient to futureproof it. It's a shame as the build quality is unimpeachable. Any attempt to upgrade any upgradeable bits (the HD) would just be money wasted when you can purchase say, a new Dell laptop capable of running Vista. This machine would have a faster processor, better video, more RAM, bigger HD and even a copy of Vista thrown in all for about £400! Maybe 6 or less years is all we can expect from computers these days before they become functionally useless.
Obviously following your example it would be entirely possible to upgrade older Macs using obsolete second hand items and in many cases I've done exactly that. It differs slightly from PC in that motherboards can't be upgraded/swapped out in the same way as generic PCs.
However, though upgrading an older pre-Intel Macintosh (the new ones haven't been about that long, so I don't know) is technically possible, by the time you've assembled the bits it costs about the same (or even slightly more) as a new cutting edge machine which has the benefit of higher bus speeds etc.
What I tend to do is keep the older machines and demote them to less onerous tasks. I even have a 13 year old black and white PowerBook that still does sterling service for word processing and spreadsheet duties when needed.
I rely on these devices to make a living and given the fact that software houses don't seem to regard making their newer feature-bloated versions faster as a priority, in my experience you have to rely on the falling prices of faster, better computer components to do the job instead.
Posting Permissions
