Tweet
Originally posted by blm
-
read what you quoted again. lol. i decided that for my uses a system that is so much more expensive is just a "waste of money" :) -
it took me a week to get my laptop to connect to my wireless system. vista kept having problems are crashingComment
-
vista is in its beta form... XP is fine.Comment
-
just the opposite for me. my computer recognized it immediately and hasn't dropped once. my other card with xp always dropped the connection.Originally posted by alwaysgrowingComment
-
I've never had an issue connecting with mine either.Comment
-
Simple answer is gaming and all of the video editing I do. The dual core just isn't cutting it, in terms of rendering the final project (I'm very impatient). I thought about it and its true I won't have a use for the computer, but my family will. My Mom was about to drop 800 on a laptop to surf the internet. Instead of having her waste her money, I spent 400 more and was able to build the computer I wanted. So, she can use my old one. Then when I graduate and, 'hopefully now', go into the Marines she can take the one I just built and give my dual core to charity or something. The computer itself is more than capable for most users needs.Originally posted by THE BOUNCER
Post Script: Have you tried Unix? It is essentially what the Mac OS is based off of.Comment
-
this is korean to me lol its jsut funny yous bitch over it why buy somethign new just wait till its perfected like anythign in the electrical industry ......Comment
-
it took me a while to find a wireless adapter that would work for vista. When i called up the company, they would tell me to go online and download a patch to fix it. Kind of tough to do when the whole point is i'm tryin to get online. Couldn't download something if my wireless signal isnt being picked upOriginally posted by THE BOUNCERComment
-
you could plug directly into the modem and download it dipshit. :POriginally posted by alwaysgrowingComment
-
where i was living at the time, we had free woreless internet in the building. so no modem to plug anything into. Come on now, don't you think i woulda done that if i couldOriginally posted by THE BOUNCERComment
-
thought you may have been a little slow. :POriginally posted by alwaysgrowing
i would bet that your wireless problems was with the building and not vista. vista seems to be very good with the wireless connection.Comment
-
ya, havent had any problems for awhile. firefox released an update like 5 days ago and it seems to have fixed it.Originally posted by radoComment
-
because it is better.Originally posted by rado
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6656808-1.html
click the little "go to round 1" buttons at the bottom to read each page of the review.Comment
-
when vista came out, i grabbed a copy right away. (i work in IT and somehow licenses come my way pretty quickly with new OS releases) i hated it at first because i was running it on a dell d620 with 1 gig of ram and a 2.33ghz cpu. i put it on my desktop which has run linux for quite a while - same problem, sluggish as hell. it just felt like a big bloated pig. i ditched it for a couple months and dismissed it as garbage. then i decided to make the d620 my work notebook because it's so much smaller than my xps m1710 - i threw a couple more gigs in my xps bringing it to 4 gigs of ram and a 2.16 ghz cpu and it's much, much faster. as far as stability goes, now that programs are being updated and written for vista, i find that it's much more stable and just as fast as xp. faster? not really...maybe a little. more stable? for sure. i do a lot of break-beat/house dj'ing on my notebook with vdj and also graphics design with photoshop/illustrator cs2 and i've found that the multimedia support in vista far outshines xp. xp is junk with regard to multimedia. always has been.
anyhow - i hated it at first and to be honest, i wanted to hate it. i despise microsoft and still find it silly that the os requires 4 gigs of ram and a minimum cpu of 2ghz...just stupid (after all - in an ideal world, the os should simply play the role of host to your apps). but this is how apps are going these days - they are requiring more and more hardware resources to supply the same bit of performance. but lets be real - this is the nature of technology. i bet you'd have trouble running nero or firefox on windows 3.1. in my opinion, vista is ahead of it's time. i think it's been deployed as a bridge to 64 bit architecture. dual core cpu's are now the standard and only going higher. it requires at least 3 gigs of ram, but 4 is better. only about 3.3-3.5 of that is addressable on a 32 bit platform and hence, my 'bridge' conclusion. as 64 bit programming becomes more common, i think vista will be attributed as the os that made it happen.
for the record: i am not a microsoft fan-boy. i think they are a terrible company for many reasons. if i had my way, i'd be running linux on all of my machines...but talk about lack of support. i love linux but it's a windows world and i resist only as much as my sanity and job stability will allow.
so yeah...vista is big. too bloated? probably. more stable? yes, and increasingly so. would i install it on my hospitals network? hell no. not for at least another year or so...Comment
-
i dont think it needs 4gigs of ram goliath. i have 2 gigs of ram and a Athlon Dual Core running Vista Premium and it is just as fast as XP.Comment
Comment