I agree 100%!!!!!!!! Vista icorporates many of the same features OSX started 5 years ago. Buying a Mac = no more computer problems!!!!
So any updates on how some of you like it yet? Much better, a little better, worse than XP? Any comparisons to OSX if you've used it?
What do you mean control+copy? the shortcut for copying? It's just apple+C, basically the same as control+c on PC's
I haven't used it a lot yet, but here is my install story. I decide to simply upgrade rather than wipe out my current disk. Even thouhg I have back ups of everything, I am generally paranoid about stuff like that. I have a Dell 5160 laptop with a 3.2 Ghz processor and 1 GB of memory. The disk is a 5400 RPM 80 GB. It took SEVEN+ hours to do the upgrade. When it was finished, I could connect to my router, but I could not get beyond it. It showed "unidentified network" and"limited connectivity". This also occurred on my wired network at work. I played around with different drivers to no avail I found an old 40 GB drive that fit my laptop. I installed it and did a clean install. This time the install took less than 1 hour and I had no networking problems. The OS takes around 27 GB (It is the "Business" version of Vista). During install, it defragments your hard drive so that adds to the time. In my case, mine is always well defragmented so I don't know exactly what it did in my case. It also moves everything from "My Documents" to \users\username, but saves the "my documents" folders, althouhg they are empty and you can't "click" on them. I haven't used it enough to make a determination yet, but it does start up and shut down faster/better than Windows XP Home and Pro. It also goes to sleep better. It has "gadgets" instead of "widgets". It does not appear to be the resource hog it is purported to be. I am anxious to try the "memory boost" feature. You can pop in a USB flash drive and the OS will use its memory for certain tasks. The kicker is that it doesn't accept just any flash drive. If it works well, then that will be an easy/cheap way to add 1 or 2 GB to your system.
What I'm waiting for is Mircosoft to realize the importance of a streamlined operating system. Instead of more bloat. Of course, they bloat their system to ensure a robust hardware market. They still believe that people will all of the sudden stop wanting the lastest pentium if they somehow don't need it to run thier operating system anymore. People will always want more power, so built a better system, one that is actually efficient rather than one that only looks that way.
Save your time with Vista. It's got plenty of issues to work out. Hopefully, a future version will have more bugs and kinks fixed up.
Can anyone here help me with itunes and quicktime. The lastest version 7.1.3 is not working on my WindowsXp. I tried re-installing it over and over, I still get 2039 error.
Thanks Bobrek. I played around w/ it myself for a few minutes in Circuit City today. Not bad. Definitely a lot of stuff copied over from OSX. Overall it looks like a hybrid between XP and OSX. I like how explorer has adopted the OSX style of browsing your computer. Start menu is still the same, overall too busy. The Windows+Tab ability is neat. Does anyone know how it handles installating? I guess OSX uses a basic drag and drop, while XP launched an installer program. Has Vista changed this? For OSX users, do all application folders & files always go under one folder. What bothered me w/ XP is that sometimes apps would default under Program Files (fine) or at the same level as Program Files (no consistency here). Does OSX do that? It didn't look like Vista changed this. I wish I could get a copy of this to test drive for a week to see if it could convince me to not jump ship to Apple on my next computer. Quite frankly the only thing I don't like is there's some great freeware VST instruments out there for Windows which are now a staple of my music production, that don't have a Mac version. Probably won't hold me back from jumping right now though. And the Macbook just looks flatout sweet.
So buy a mac and install XP on it for your special programs. And to answer your questions The installation system is identical now. Both in terms of having an installer and in terms of placing them in the program files directory. OSX lets you put the program anywhere you want (almost always in applications for most people) by default since its drag and drop.
Yeah, I just paid $200 for an Office serial number in September cuz Windows wouldn't recognize my old one from my old computer, so Microsoft can go f*ck itself, for the time being at least.
This doesn't really get around using VST's though. You usually always run vst instruments at the same time as Cubase. Meaning I'd have to also run Cubase on XP. In essence I'd be buying a Macbook and booting into XP 75% of the time. Doesn't really make much sense in my case. It would be great if they could come up w/ some kind of wrapper that would allow Cubase to host Windows vst's, although this sounds really improbable. I will probably just try to make do w/ out some of the vst's and hope to find some decent alternatives. I'd also like to give Logic a try and see if it's more efficient w/ my work flow or not. Thanks for the info on the installers. But I'm still not clear, I think you're saying Vista is the same as XP? Anyways, as I was playing around w/ Vista I saw quite a few programs installed at the top level (C:\appname\ rather than c:\program files\appname). I always make sure to change it to install under Program Files if it doesn't by default on my computer. Always been a compulsive pet peeve of mine.
Run Paralells for mac. It's a pretty fast virtualization program that allows windows and mac to be run at the same time at normal speeds. Although, you would need to check whether your programs would run properly with parallels. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels_Desktop_for_Mac I do the same thing all the time with program files. The directory that it installs to by default is controlled by the program you are installing so whoever created it my default to a different directory level. I don't think XP or Vista ever forces all programs to install the the program files folder
Any updates? What advantages(if any) have you seen? What disadvantages(if any) have you seen thus far? Is it primarily good for high level graphics progams like some games, video and photo software?
