40 replies to this topic

[XtothaZ]

personally, i prefer it

the only thing i don't like is that i sometimes have trouble playing older pc games



EDIT:sorry, just relized i'm prlly in the wrong forum

Edited by XtothaZ, 08 February 2008 - 10:48 PM.

[sonesay]

Most people do not like it because it requires so much CPU power and Memory space to run efficiently. On slower computers you will not be able to run windows vista. I think another problem is people find it packed with too many software/features they would not use. I remember when vista came out my mate playing final fantasy xi could not install the game on his vista laptop. I've use windows vista personally for a short time on a friends computer. It looks great but I have not really had the time to explore the features in it. Her computer was new so it did seem to run fine but I doubt it would run smoothly when more programs are installed and hard disk space taken up. I think its a great OS for new people since it is more user friendly then say Linux. Its still hard to compare Vista to Mac OS x as to what is more user friendly, I think Windows is still more user friend just because more software people use like the office suites are being used widely.

I do hate Microsoft personally for having poor software thats being exploited. One example was with internet explorer just late last year there was a flaw in its active x with real player that allowed scripts to be run on the host machine and a Trojan loaded later to log passwords. This was used on the FFXI online game community and i think hundreds or maybe more players got their accounts stolen. The exploit was loaded on many trusted final fantasy resource websites that provided players with guides and information regarding the game. It was sad that the add companies displaying banners got hijacked and then the exploit code was loaded from there.

My friend lost his account through that, The symptoms he gave me was his computer was running slow and he thinks hes got a virus. I thought it was nothing then and told him to stop visiting porn sites and downloading their stuff. He had a good laugh at him thinking that was the case but it turns out it was internet explorer being hijacked, I should of paid more attention and asked him what browser he was using. If I knew I would of told him to use Firefox but its too late now hes lost his account because of using internet explorer.

Thats another reason why I hate windows and its software.

[XtothaZ]

sonesay, on Feb 8 2008, 06:12 PM, said:

Most people do not like it because it requires so much CPU power and Memory space to run efficiently. On slower computers you will not be able to run windows vista. I think another problem is people find it packed with too many software/features they would not use. I remember when vista came out my mate playing final fantasy xi could not install the game on his vista laptop. I've use windows vista personally for a short time on a friends computer. It looks great but I have not really had the time to explore the features in it. Her computer was new so it did seem to run fine but I doubt it would run smoothly when more programs are installed and hard disk space taken up. I think its a great OS for new people since it is more user friendly then say Linux. Its still hard to compare Vista to Mac OS x as to what is more user friendly, I think Windows is still more user friend just because more software people use like the office suites are being used widely.

I do hate Microsoft personally for having poor software thats being exploited. One example was with internet explorer just late last year there was a flaw in its active x with real player that allowed scripts to be run on the host machine and a Trojan loaded later to log passwords. This was used on the FFXI online game community and i think hundreds or maybe more players got their accounts stolen. The exploit was loaded on many trusted final fantasy resource websites that provided players with guides and information regarding the game. It was sad that the add companies displaying banners got hijacked and then the exploit code was loaded from there.

My friend lost his account through that, The symptoms he gave me was his computer was running slow and he thinks hes got a virus. I thought it was nothing then and told him to stop visiting porn sites and downloading their stuff. He had a good laugh at him thinking that was the case but it turns out it was internet explorer being hijacked, I should of paid more attention and asked him what browser he was using. If I knew I would of told him to use Firefox but its too late now hes lost his account because of using internet explorer.

Thats another reason why I hate windows and its software.

yeah, what you said makes perfect sense. Because i started using vista when i bought my new laptop.....thats why i didn't notice it took so much cpu power and memory

and vista does have alot of software, while most of it cool and nice to have ... some of it i don't even need..

[csp4.0]

I don't hate windows vista, but I dislike it... Its minimum system requirements are too high for a 'mainstream' operating system.

It also has a lot of extremely unnecessary software built inside it which takes up a lot more RAM and CPU usage than it really needs...

I also think that Vista's Aero and sidebar takes up too much RAM, heck I would rather have the sidebar have less of a 'crystal' look and use less RAM.

[tricky77puzzle]

My computer runs Vista without a hiccup (except when I run certain XP-compatible programs, then it throws up completely), but that's because it's pretty darn good. It gets a 5.2 on the "Vista Experience Index".

When I don't use vista, I have Kubuntu 7.10 installed in case something goes wrong with Windows (like a corrupt Chinese filename such as ??????.mp3) and I have to fix it in a Unix-like operating system which won't return errors with bad filenames.

Other than that, I don't really have much beef with Vista.

[Hagebyhemdata]

First thing said is that Windows Vista are a operating system that requires alot from
a system running it. Windows Vista are more like a eyecandy, and therefore required
more of a system to give you a nice graphic user interface. Like Windows Aero and
the Sidepanel are features that increase your feelings for both your workspace and
playground. Keeping that in mind when you are making a slight comparison between
a system running Windows XP and Windows Vista.

A system running Windows Vista requires at least 1 GB RAM Memory to work properly
(Windows XP requires 256 MB) are what most computer stores are telling me. By
helping and supporting people with their computers, I think 1 GB is too little to making
the system run smoothly. One or two week and the systems loading time begining to
make you both tired and frustrated. My best friend bought a 800 euro HP computer,
with Windows Vista Home basic, with 1 GB RAM memory. One month later he was
upgrading his computer with another 2 GB, but it wasn't an easy month, poor fella,
he was swearing alot at his new bought computer and resisted that a new computer
should last more than a week before running into problems. Instead of going back
to that computer store and claim his money back, which I would done directly, he
accepted the situation. I couldn't myself sell a computer to a customer, that I knew
would give him problem and in the end would brought my customer back for
compensation.

If you like to upgrade your computer from Windows XP to Windows Vista, and your
computer are a couple of years old, you may not get the full visual Vista experience,
simply because that your hardware won't fully run Vista. When we are here with running
issues, there are also problems by running applications and games that are a couple of
years old. Some programs have ofcourse updates whom you can apply to keep up
running your favourite games and programs. Burt unfortunate there are some who not
have updates and won't run in vista, pearls that become abandon by falling off due to
software incompability in Windows Vista.

The next stone to cast on Windows Vista are certainly the Windows Vista User Account
Control (UAC), that have driven me insane a couple of times, and my automatical
response when I see a UAC protected account at my customers, is; "Do you wish me to
inactivate the UAC?". Well the UAC feature is great if there are any spyware attempting
to install anything without your acknowledge, but for most common users have often
good browser behavior, and do not enter websites that looks suspicious.

Next thing I hate in Windows Vista is the lack of drivers. How about upgrading you computer
to a Windows Vista ome premium? By the way, you won't be running your superb soundcard,
because theres no support for your soundcard in Vista. Not interested!

csp4.0, on Feb 9 2008, 01:53 AM, said:

I also think that Vista's Aero and sidebar takes up too much RAM, heck I would rather have the
sidebar have less of a 'crystal' look and use less RAM.

Yes, the Aero is occupies alot of your RAM. Did you know that Vista's Aero graphics eat
laptop battery power too. If you're travelling alot with your laptop, and using it while you
travel, you will see that your laptop battery becomes quickly empty. Reconsider this,
there are possibilities to change from Aero to Basic in Vista.

[bishoujo]

I hate it because it's incompatible with a lot of hardware that I previously used with Windows XP, like my printer and my MP3 player, which I could originally charge using XP. Unfortunately, i'm stuck with using it right now. I have to use my desktop for other applications.

[anachro]

I don't like vista (I'm using it right as I type this). Its very restrictive, and you have no control (you can't even change your default internet browser!), and it asked for alot of questions of things when you just told it to do so. I really think Microsoft should take some hints from Apple, and find a better way of restricting things, without limiting options, because at one point I hate my new laptop so much I wanted to break it, get a new one, sell it BRAND NEW on Ebay, and buy a Mac because of how free and secure they are (it's ridiculously unbelievable how well Mac has it, and yet they are still not the major industry PC makers, its STUPID)

it IS true that it uses alot of CPU memory, but for me its what you CAN'T DO with YOUR OWN PERSONAL COMPUTER.

buy a mac if your going for anything but gamming. if your rich, buy both, use the Vista for gaming because more games are Windows compatible.

[coolcat50]

Vista takes up way too much RAM. I have at least 70 processes going at any one time even if I am away from my computer and nothing is running but Vista. I like its look though, and since I am the only user of my computer, I have as much access as possible. I think it is alright, but it still is worse than XP.

[dre]

Vista is a scam, just like DirectX 10. False comparisons between DX 9 and DX 10 and pretty much a requirement that pre-build systems come with Vista have a big effect on the computer-illiterate people. There's no reason why DX10 can't be on XP besides the fact that they'd lose money on both software and the fact that people won't have to upgrade/buy better computers.

[awesomebill61]

anachro, on Feb 9 2008, 01:31 AM, said:

I don't like vista (I'm using it right as I type this). Its very restrictive, and you have no control (you can't even change your default internet browser!), and it asked for alot of questions of things when you just told it to do so. I really think Microsoft should take some hints from Apple, and find a better way of restricting things, without limiting options, because at one point I hate my new laptop so much I wanted to break it, get a new one, sell it BRAND NEW on Ebay, and buy a Mac because of how free and secure they are (it's ridiculously unbelievable how well Mac has it, and yet they are still not the major industry PC makers, its STUPID)

it IS true that it uses alot of CPU memory, but for me its what you CAN'T DO with YOUR OWN PERSONAL COMPUTER.

buy a mac if your going for anything but gamming. if your rich, buy both, use the Vista for gaming because more games are Windows compatible.

i have vista and i changed my default internet browser to firefox.... no problem

i never notice any problems with vista not being fast either... but my computer has a 5.4 vista experience score so it should do pretty good.

and as for security flaws, windows is attacked far more than any other OS.... mac has what? 5% market share? and linux distros arent even over 1%?
that leaves well over 90% of the population using windows computers.... which means for every 1 person who tries to exploit flaws in a mac theres 100 people trying to exploit flaws in windows.
i'm sure OS X has just as many flaws as vista, theres just nobody who exploits them.

and from a performance standpoint, SP1 supposedly really really improves vista's performance.

[CrashCore]

Vista is the plague of all operating systems. Using Vista is equivalent to saying, "I want to make my up-to-date hardware run as slow as possible. Maybe I can even reduce it pre-five-years-ago speeds!" But seriously, as previously mentioned, Vista has a ridiculously high memory and CPU usage. This is why Linux is so great: everything is able to be personalized! If you're like me and always set up your Windows XP machines to use no graphical effects and not use the Luna display theme because it will slow down your PC ever so little, you can find or make a Linux distribution that has a small footprint. Or, you can always continue to use a combination of XP and Linux like I do.

[rs redemption]

on some of the computers that I have used, it really slowed me down. couple that with the lack of compatibility with some programs, and it makes it a really tough operating system to get used to. Aside from that however, there are always bugs in a new OS, like XP for instance. It wasn't really a 'preferred' OS until like SP2, and at that point the majority of people started switching over from 98 and (ugh) ME.

That stated, I have used my step mom's computer, which has Vista on it, just to surf the web and whatnot, and it really is a nice operating system both in looks and performance, as long as you have the equipment to run it well, and aren't attempting to use anything that is not compatible with it.

[hawkfan45]

People Irritate me with their Useless Vista sucks rants. There is nothing wrong with the actual operating system that makes it run slow. If you have under 1.5 gb of ram its going to run regular but not fast. If you have 2+ gb of ram it will run great. Its a highly graphical system. The only people that hate it are computer illiterate people who can't read the box that has minimum or "recommended requirements". If your computer doesn't meet them then don't get it. The only reason to really get it is on a new BUILT for vista computer. Memory is cheap anyway, you can get 4 gb of ram on newegg for around $120 dollars. 4 gb of ram will make vista run fine seeing that you have a good processor and a decent video card. For the video card you need a minimum of 128 mb just for vista. Yes it may hog it, but vista was built for computers with good hardware. To meet the reccomended requirements may not be enough. But the reccomended is not always whats best.

Hate the computer not the operating system.
Hawk

[dre]

Quote

There is nothing wrong with the actual operating system that makes it run slow.

Really? Is that so?

Quote

If you have 2+ gb of ram it will run great.

Well that's a shame since most games today will take all that ram away and you'll be using your oh-so-fast swap file.

Quote

Memory is cheap anyway, you can get 4 gb of ram on newegg for around $120 dollars.

Or not. Well, unless you want crap.

Quote

If your computer doesn't meet them then don't get it.

Even though it does I still wont get it.

Quote

Yes it may hog it, but vista was built for computers with good hardware.

Please tell me why I would knowingly install a hog onto my computer. What kind of magic is it able to do since it requires so much?

Quote

Hate the computer not the operating system.

Or not. You'll be hating your wallet later.

Also, I love how your post says

Quote

There is nothing wrong with the actual operating system that makes it run slow.

and then later it says

Quote

Yes it may hog it, but vista was built for computers with good hardware.

I just find that hilarious. Oh, and welcome to Trap17.

Edited by dre, 11 February 2008 - 01:31 AM.

[rvalkass]

hawkfan45, on Feb 10 2008, 09:13 PM, said:

There is nothing wrong with the actual operating system that makes it run slow. If you have under 1.5 gb of ram its going to run regular but not fast. If you have 2+ gb of ram it will run great. Its a highly graphical system.

The colossal number of background processes may have something to do with the poor performance, along with the GUI taking up more processing power than it should, even at the graphical levels being used. If Microsoft had really thought about it, optimised the graphics and background processes, and allowed more tuning for how the graphics look, then performance might not be so much of an issue.

hawkfan45, on Feb 10 2008, 09:13 PM, said:

The only people that hate it are computer illiterate people who can't read the box that has minimum or "recommended requirements".

I rather take offence at being told that I can't read. I think you'll find that a large number of literate people also hate Vista. For example, a large proportion of the open source community hate it. People who have boxes popping up every 30 seconds asking for permission to do something are also getting pretty annoyed with it. People who find their hardware and software suddenly doesn't work are quite annoyed too. Laptop owners who find their batteries draining like charge is going out of fashion also hate Vista. And, of course, each of those people also fits into the group who has to pay around £200 for this dud operating system.

hawkfan45, on Feb 10 2008, 09:13 PM, said:

If your computer doesn't meet them then don't get it. The only reason to really get it is on a new BUILT for vista computer.

A large number of manufacturers are selling computers with Vista that meet the requirements, and still run slow. They are built specifically for Vista and it still doesn't work!

hawkfan45, on Feb 10 2008, 09:13 PM, said:

Memory is cheap anyway, you can get 4 gb of ram on newegg for around $120 dollars. 4 gb of ram will make vista run fine seeing that you have a good processor and a decent video card. For the video card you need a minimum of 128 mb just for vista. Yes it may hog it, but vista was built for computers with good hardware. To meet the reccomended requirements may not be enough. But the reccomended is not always whats best.

4GB of unbranded RAM is around £60 (120 USD). If you want RAM that will actually work, you can get 4GB of Corsair RAM for around £80 (160 USD). That new DX10 graphics card you need is around another £50 to £70 depending on whether you want something from a good name (even those these prices are for the bare minimum required). Then you need the operating system. XP is roughly £50. Vista? £197.36! So that is a total cost of around £300 to £350, without upgrading your processor, motherboard or any peripherals that aren't going to work with Vista.

Alternatively, of course, I save all that money and run KDE4 with Compiz Fusion to get all the glossy effects people love so much for £0.00, after spending £0.00 on required hardware upgrades of course. Wow, that's a saving of at least £300...

[heavensounds]

Some like it, some don't! Let's think about it from another point of view. Vista was a big big boom and bam that Microsoft tried to make a few years ago, but they ran into A LOT of problems trying to make a new great operating system that would close anti-microsoft mouths around the world....the failed BUT there was the promise and they waited as long as they could to create something that is not completely bad, but of course it is not great as promised. So yeah this is how it is, it is an ok operating system with all the latest things you need, but it runs slowly, sometimes just too slow and works well only on the latest computers...

I think that we should all wait for the new so called "Windows Vienna" or something like that which is again, PROMISED to be really new with completely new code from scratch...and I hope that they will make it with vienna..but problems are inevitable even with that high amount of money involved...

[zamaliphe]

OK what i hate and what i like in windows vista

first what i like will Microsoft are a thief

thy stole most of Linux stuff like
Linux command line

commands like "kill" was one of the best in Linux
and Meany moor

i think allot of people did complain about boor command line of windows
will vista is much beater
in this side now

and the eay candy stuff
i did try Linux with Beryl 3d effects

and it much much much beater than Windows vista
but the only way to use Windows vista is that most of

mobile software work only under windows

so I'm stuck with vista
by the way i did use the same 3d effects and even beater on Linux with only 256 MB of ram

but when it come to vista 1GB of ram is not good to run the system

and i think that the next windows will need 4 GB of ram at last just to be installed

by the way my MB maximum capletey of ram is 4GB
are you still asking why we didn't like vista much

Edited by zamaliphe, 11 February 2008 - 11:01 AM.

[Amiel]

I hate Microsoft Windows Vista because of some reasons:

1st: I hate Microsoft Windows Vista because of it's system requirements. Oh cmon, it's very hard to get high specifications this time. Evey PC specs are very expensive and they are not worthy to buy in my opinion. Well, could you imagine, 1 gb ram could exactly give you the satisfaction? Think, it's Windows Vista, there are too many things and etc loaded and added there which are not important. For me as a consumer, 1 gb is not enough to run Windows Vista. I need atleast 2 gb ram to run that.

2nd: I hate Microsoft Windows Vista because of it's precious price. Oh cmon again. Microsoft Windows Vista is very expensive here in our country. So, pirated CD's are being sold in markets and everywhere! I almost cry when I saw it's price here. I cant imagine that at first, I need a 2 gb of RAM to run it, plus now, I need atleast 400 $ to buy Microsoft Windows Vista? I dont think so. I'd rather wait and I need to earn more money, so I can buy the luxurious Mac OS!

3rd: I hate Microsoft Windows Vista because of it is just a shiny version of Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005! Well, it is more shiny, but I still hate it. I really prefer into the boring and classic original design of Microsoft's 95, 98, 2000, and ME!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But even though I love to hate it, Microsoft Windows Vista can assure us that we are safe. It has great programs but others dont help though. For now, I'll stick with Microsoft Windows XP!

-Amiel

[Galahad]

hawkfan45, on Feb 10 2008, 10:13 PM, said:

The only people that hate it are computer illiterate people who can't read the box that has minimum or "recommended requirements".

Are you saying that 12 years of software development makes me illiterate? Choose your words more carefully in the future friend... I don't hate vista, as that would be a waste of my time and emotions on something that doesn't deserve a second of my time...

When I choose an operating system, I don't want it to hog all my resources... I don't need a fancy shiny operating system, I need an operating system that works... If I bought 2G of RAM, then I bought it to be used, but not to be used by an operating system, so I'd have to buy more RAM... Why do you thing businesses and corporations haven't made the switch from XP to Vista? Because it's cost ineffective... It would cost them millions to upgrade their computer systems, and millions more to buy Vista... And what do they get? Nothing... Just a big scam, that actually doesn't look that nice afterall...

I'll just remind you of a Linux desktop managers, like Beryl, that has a rotating 3D cube, that runs smoothly on 1.6GHz computer, with 1GB RAM... Movie is playing on one side, music on the other, while internet is on the third... And all of thet is being watched from the top side, mirrored! And there's no hickups...

Operating system is supposed to be designed to run in the background, not to be the front end application... Operating systems, by function, should consume as little computer power as possible, not the opposite... Why would a home user, who has no income from the computer, give away about 400-600€ for they computer and OS, that will often hickup, when they can have a perfectly running compuet for 250€?

I could say that people who run Vista are people, who just happen to have too much money and spare time on their hands, and do not depend on their computer to make money...

Sadly, M$ will eventually make people migrate from XP to Vista, just as they did make people migrate from Win98 to XP in the past... However, I won't be one of them...

[tricky77puzzle]

Galahad, on Feb 12 2008, 04:26 AM, said:

Sadly, M$ will eventually make people migrate from XP to Vista, just as they did make people migrate from Win98 to XP in the past...

I think MS (Yes, I don't use derogatory names, like Linsux, Fackintosh (<- swearword?) and Windoze), after they make people migrate from XP to Vista, will cut off compatibility in an update. This will ensure that people stay with Vista. It's sad how they go through things.

[darran]

Personally, I had the choice of choosing to upgrade to Vista or switch over to Leopard (Mac). I did the latter, and I am glad I did so after hearing the massive complaints in this thread as well as from all my friends on how resource intensive Vista is. Though the minimum requirements is 1GB, to actually run it decently (not high end); you would basically need 2GB of memory. And notice the keyword is decently, to run smoothly, even more memory is needed.

Sure enough Vista is reborned with a classy and beautiful interface, the glossiness was nonetheless copied from Mac. Where is the innovation in the design which Microsoft has promised? I do disagree about the fact you should only get a Mac if you don't game much. I do play games like WoW and Pro Evolution Soccer 2008 which is running on my Windows XP partition. Once again, I have not touched Vista and unless by force, will never ever use it.

[logansmeadow]

Personally, my switch to vista has been relatively flawless for the programs that I run....that being said I bought a new computer a year ago and had no choice. XP was no longer available where I made my purchase.
I've been relatively happy with it. Once I made my piece with the constant "Are you okay with this action" pop ups when I was customizing and the odd upgrade needed I was okay. My only BIG problems were the fact my one year old printer was obsolete and I was forced to buy a new one as an upgrade wasn't going to be available for another 4 months (grrr).

If I was to do t all over again though......I think I would have gone the Mac route, just to try it out at the very least. In all honesty I only stayed with Windows due to the graphics program I have become accustomed to.

[rayzoredge]

I'm starting to get sick of this whole comparison gig where one OS supposedly copied another. It's starting to get to the point where I don't care anymore, as long as the OS works well.

I haven't gotten a chance to sit down and play around with a Vista machine, but I just hear horror stories after horror stories. Same with Mac's Leopard. And of course, Linux's Ubuntu is always in development.

A lot of people are going to have a mixed bag of opinions when it comes to operating systems because everyone uses them in different ways. Developers will probably bash them for inefficiency; geeks will bash them for being incompatible with a majority of applications and/or hardware (driver support); and everyday computer-illiterate (normal ) consumers will appreciate the new operating systems for their shiny eye candy. (And we all know how we love our shiny eye candy.)

I got the chance to play around with a Mac with Leopard installed at Best Buy and for the very basics, I can safely say that it's okay if you're doing the very basics. I never got too in-depth into it, but given the opportunity I'll explore it more and probably give you a different opinion on the operating system itself. Funny enough, it strikes a VERY strong semblance to Ubuntu... especially the Control Panel/System Preferences/System Settings section. (I don't know who came up with that look first and I'm starting to not care.)

Nowadays, it's hard to actually pitch operating systems against each other as being the best, as each operating system almost caters to certain audiences. Windows XP is the staple for most computers nowadays, and in my opinion, Professional SP2 is the best in terms of software variety (especially our beloved Adobe programs). Things just work on SP2, and really, it's one of two operating systems right now that actually can boast that "it just works" that I know of personally.

Vista is on the opposite spectrum, apparently, being much of a resource hog and incompatible with a lot of things. I have no real experience on the operating system so I can't say much about it.

I haven't touched Mac OS X aside from general use on my buddy's Macbook, and it's okay as far as general use. Leopard brings more features to the table, but if it's actually like Mac OS X, it wins my book for being visually-pleasing, easy to pick up, and being expensive as hell. Not to mention that I hate this elitist thing that goes on for a lot of Mac users.

I've been using Kubuntu on and off for a bit, so I'm sort of familiar with it. It is the second one of the two that I can safely say that things just work... but if it doesn't, be prepared to be lost in researching for an answer to your problem. If you're not familiar with Linux, you can get lost with the command lines and the feeling that you have to be a geek to play with 'nix operating systems. It's constantly being developed, so I can say that there's hardly anything actually WRONG with the operating system, but then again, a lot of programs for Linux, although free, may be ridden with bugs (unless it's out of beta).

So basically...

- Windows XP is still going to be popular, in my opinion, until Vista becomes more viable. It's probably what most PC users will stick to.

- Windows Vista is still not a good move yet. I don't know what the first service pack fixed, but until it actually performs better than its predecessor in terms of compatibility and performance (in proportion), computer-literate consumers will stay wary.

- Mac OS X is apparently pleasing the Apple crowd. It seems easy to use and is visually-pleasing, but it comes at a high cost to be "in" with the younger, hipper crowd, as Apple almost seems to be gearing their products towards.

- Leopard seems to follow the Mac OS X legacy, although peer reviews suggest otherwise. I'm thinking that it's on the same path with Vista, although nowhere nearly as bad.

- The Linux distribution of Ubuntu seems to be heading in the right direction, offering a complete, working operating operating systems with hundreds if not thousands of alternative, open-source software [all for free, mind you], but continued development, beta programs, and an intimidating (and almost necessary) inhabitance of the shell console keeps most everyday people away. This is changing, however, as Ubuntu is becoming even more user-friendly. (I think that most other distributions may cater moreso to certain computer-literate tastes, although my experience out of Kubuntu only includes Freespire, in which I didn't spend much time on.)

[dre]

Quote

A lot of people are going to have a mixed bag of opinions when it comes to operating systems because everyone uses them in different ways.

You'd get confusion from most people if you mention Linux, maybe even Mac. Most people are just too lazy to actually investigate the differences between the OS's themselves and assume that 'big brother' knows best so Vista is the way to go.

Quote

I'm starting to get sick of this whole comparison gig where one OS supposedly copied another. It's starting to get to the point where I don't care anymore, as long as the OS works well.

Nobody makes you read it, it's just there, and it will always be there. And most comparisons aren't interested in claiming others copied it, they're mostly out there to try and inform people that there's other options.

Quote

Funny enough, it strikes a VERY strong semblance to Ubuntu... especially the Control Panel/System Preferences/System Settings section. (I don't know who came up with that look first and I'm starting to not care.)

It's like saying "Alright everybody, lets get us a new idea in the next 30 seconds, never thought before." People are bound to make things similar to the things that inspired them.