Vista successor in 2009

no those aren't the services for transfer speeds. See that's your problem. doesn't run out the box so you went back. Which is fair enough. But you can't then go and slate it.
 
The transfer speed issue is well documented and it is because Vista takes the urine working how long it will take to transfer this slowing down the whole process. It's meant to be fixed in SP1 but not installed it yet
 
Start >> Control Panel >> Programs and Features

Click on " Turn windows features on or off" on the left side of the panel

Uncheck "Remote Differential Compression


You can also try disabling superfetch.
 
if you look at proper business range PC's and laptops you will see that they all have ranges specced out with Windows XP Professional.

The move to Vista business has not been recieved well by business and this is keeping the market and demand bouyant for XP Pro machinery.

Check toshiba satellite A200 range, HP 6715, 6820, Lenovo n200's all come in Vista Business and XP Pro sku's. and the XP Pro sku's outsell the Business ones by quite a margin.

some manufacturers are offering dual boot/Vista Business as default with a roll back disc for XP Pro to entice more businesses to at least try Vista.
 
AcidHell2 said:
doesn't run out the box so you went back. Which is fair enough. But you can't then go and slate it.
Click to expand...
To be honest I think you can - it's not unreasonable to expect an OS 6 years in the making to work when you install it. Having something as simple as a file copying bug exist that won't be fully fixed until the first service pack is an embarrassment.

If it's a case of disabling a few services then a patch should have been released to disable those services within weeks of it first being raised as an issue.
 
Entai said:
That would just be Microsoft going back to how things used to be. People think that because there was a huge gap (6 years) between Windows XP being launched and Vista being launched, that it will be another 6 years or so before the next launch.

In the good old days Microsoft pretty much launched a new OS every 2 to 3 years, so I would not be surprised at all if Vista's sucessor will be out within a couple of years at the most. Microsoft will not want to repeat the drawn out gestation of Vista, they will, I am sure, cut some fuctionality to get a quicker release this time.

Windows 1.0 launched 11/1985
Windows 2.0 launched 12/1987
Windows 3.0 launched 05/1990
Windows 3.1 launched 04/1992
Windows 3.11 launched 11/1993
Windows 95 launched 08/1995
Windows 98 launched 06/1998
Windows 2000 launched 02/2000
Windows ME launched 09/2000
Windows XP launched 08/2001
Windows Vista launched 01/2007
Possible OS update (will be bigger than a service pack but not a new OS) sometime between Vista and 7
Windows 7 (Major new OS not just a refeshed Vista) new launch date 2nd half 2009 , originally sheduled for early 2010.
Click to expand...

Even then there's a few releases missed out, e.g. Win95b, WinNT, XP64, Server 2003 etc.

We also need to bear in mind that with Whistler (XP), MS decided to try and merge Home/Corporate workstation Windows into one package, so it's only natural that we don't get so many releases any more (compared to Win9x/NT and WinME/2k).
 
MS, also, pulled a lot of programmers off Vista to work on SP2 that introduced a lot to XP. Which they gave away for free and i remember at the time a lot of people where grumbling the same as they are about Vista.
 
JimpsEd said:
No, it is a rewrite - from the ground up, and probably won't be due 2009. Google for it, it has been confirmed for a long time (even on Wikipedia).
Click to expand...
I don't know why anyone would think its a rewrite. All the new technology in Vista is forming the basis for Windows 7.

Microsoft has never "rewritten" Windows at any stage of its life, ever. Even the common conception that Vista was a "rewrite" is completely and utterly wrong.

They did in the late 80's hire a load of DEC engineers which brought Windows NT to the table in the early 90's and that was being developed side-by-side Windows 3.x and 9x for many years until Windows XP finally brought NT to the consumer market.

Windows 7 will just be a progression of what we have received in Vista. From my understanding the current feature list is something like:

1. Hypervisor technology in the kernel allowing seamless virtual machines to be running without the user really knowing or caring. Ultimate in backwards compatibility but also in VM performance (if you think VMware is fast you've seen nothing yet ;)). Allows Windows 7 to break backward compatibility in certain areas but re-provide it using a VM.
2. WPF 2.0 and Desktop Compositor improvements... more performance and hardware offloading. Better timeslicing of work units between available GPUs. Better support of multiple GPUs from different brands. Allow multiple graphics drivers to be installed of different versions and vendors and still be able to run the OS with the Desktop Compositor enabled.
3. Whole new Explorer shell and user experience. On the scale of user experience changes that were seen between Win3.1 and Win95. The "task bar" for example may be completely reinvented in Windows 7.
 
mrn said:
it's just not good enough, there were too many things removed from it... WinFS being one.
Click to expand...

Go on ;) I dare you to try thinking of another?

The only other cornerstone feature that was removed was Palladium (the TCPA initiative) but I can't think of a single person that was looking forward to that. Because of course anything that involves DRM is pure evil ;)

Most anti-Vista people that bring this subject up don't actually know what WinFS was and what it was going to do for them. Nor did they know what Palladium was, because it certainly didn't have anything to do with stopping you downloading illegal MP3s (as was the common belief at the time).
 
Yes but the thing people don't know about Vista is that although it dropped WinFS it retained all the features it was going to provide anyway :D

Instant Search...
Saved Searches...

Microsoft was having major problems with performance in alpha builds of WinFS. In the end they decided to drop the feature and just revamp the Indexing Service (OK, "rewrite" in this case is probably a more accurate description). It took some doing but eventually they had the Indexing Service providing all the features that WinFS was going to provide and at the same not hurting performance at all. And the best thing is it can be turned off whereas WinFS was going to be an always-on integral part of the OS. Basically the "better design" won at the end of the day and IMO that shouldn't be considered a "loss" nor should it damage Vista's reputation.
 
mrn said:
There isn't a very compelling business case for Vista over XP, especially as Microsoft will still be supporinting it with Service Packs and security Patches until atleast the next version of Windows ships.
Click to expand...

I've read MS will not be supporting XP after April 2009.

They seem to really want everyone to move onto Vista.

I can see it happening, too. After the initial couple of months or so of issues mainly with vista's drivers (for me, anyway), I now think it is lightyears ahead of XP in terms of stability. In terms of speed I notice little difference, but I haven't used XP for a while now.

I agree that there isn't much of a business case currently for migrating to Vista. I think this may change though with the release of Server 2008, which I'm looking forward to having a play with.

Butters said:
no, corporations will not switch to Vista.
Click to expand...

That's a bold statement, and I think you will be proved wrong.

Everything, in my opinion, that Microsoft have done fully suggests they want everyone to use Vista.

Incidentally, Tubelines, a company who run the maintenance on three of London's underground lines, have already (or are in the process of) making the change to Vista.

This is, if all is to be believed on how Vista is winME take 2, a massive risk for both Tubelines and Microsoft.

Seeing as everything Tubelines do is absolutely critical in keeping these lines running (Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly) they're gonna have a hell of a lot of explaining to do come the point at which VistaME falls over and those three lines are brought to standstill. Being each and every Londoner's single point of hate is a position that nightmares are made of.

If MS had any doubts about Vista working for Tubelines, I doubt they would've let Tubelines take the upgrade as the negative publicity that would emerge would be immense. Additionally, would Tubelines really want the hatred of the whole of London?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom