Vista prices - Page 6

ArcticStones · 02-20-2007, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwtnospam


	Unfortunately, I don't think it's a level playing field... Apple needs to come up with great solutions just to get their foot in the door.

Of course it’s not a level playing field!
And like I said, they do have to come up with really great solutions.

For starters, Apple can prove that OSX 10.6 Leopard leapfrogs waaayyy beyond Vista -- for Enterprise Level customers as well. But to really play the game, they probably need to do far more of what Tom Larkin has indicated in this and other threads.

Pro Grape · 02-20-2007, 05:40 PM

I got Vista Business for free as soon as it came out

because I am a software engineering student. I dislike it. Aero isn't integrated into the contents of windows in the least; it's just a frill round the edges that makes the window borders thicker and the appearance busier and uglier. The new security features are really obtrusive, just as in the Apple ad. The new start menu is clumsier to use than XP's start menu. The only thing I like is IE7 (now better than Firefox as Windows browsers go), but of course you can run that on XP as well. There are no other real differences -- for the most part it's a dressed up XP. I wouldn't spend money on it, and I only installed it because I play games once in a while and to develop software on when needed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAlvarez


	Vista is so bad. So horribly broken. They SHOULD capitalize on it. They just need to be careful and not turn public opinion against themselves. Vista is the reason I switched to a Mac (back when it was called Longhorn). I loaded it up, saw just how doomed Windows was, ordered a PowerBook, transferred the data, put my Dell on eBay, and that was it. Maybe I understate myself: Vista is horribly broken.

You made your decision prematurely because at the time Vista was still in beta. You can't go around saying software is broken after you tried it only while it was in production.

schneb · 02-20-2007, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pro Grape


	You made your decision prematurely because at the time Vista was still in beta. You can't go around saying software is broken after you tried it only while it was in production.

I know what CAlvarez is saying. He saw the direction Microsoft was going, and it did not look pretty. The original release of OS10.0 was terrible, however, I knew the direction that Apple was going, and I was able to bare with its problems for years until they got all the kinks out.
Recently, I beta tested SoundBooth by Adobe. I could see the direction they were going, but was very disappointed. So unless they started from scratch, there was nothing it could offer me for future consideration unless they completely rebuilt it.

tlarkin · 02-20-2007, 07:13 PM

actually exchange 2007 is pretty nice too. MS finally went back to thinking about what an email server should do. They view it as a commodity(sp?) now and think that your email server should just work, the same way you can just pick up your phone and it works. Setting quotas, rules, etc for mailboxes and users is very easy and straight forward now. Exchange itself runs real smooth, even when its just a virtual machine. All the demos today were done on virtual machines on laptops, and all of them ran pretty well. Another cool new feature in exchange is virtual firewalls on your network. Lets say you own a consulting company, and you have two consultants helping out two major corporations. Consultant A is working for UPS, and Consultant B is working for Fed Ex, so naturally both companies would not want Consultants A and B talking to each other. You can now set up a virtual firewall to block emails from people in your internal network. You can set the rules to block all emails except emails containing certain text or words or whatever. So, like if the subject line says, emergency it could pass through the firewall. Or if you don't like someone in your office just block all email from them

Vista actually offers a lot of good new features, however it also is not worth the cash for the upgrade in some perspectives. Some of the added security seems very well thought out in one hand, and in the other hand I see where it could also have side effects. Either way, no one will fully know until vista has been out for a while. Some of the new features it offers I was unaware of, and some of them also come in packages, meaning you have to buy a server side application to go with it.

WDS (windows deployment server) is pretty bad ass when it comes to deploying applications and the OS itself, and it makes it very easy to manage your images, update your images, etc.

Some of the new security features, you know the ones that Apple make fun of, actually could come in handy depending on what your company does.

Pro Grape · 02-21-2007, 01:57 AM



Hm, Exchange sounds interesting... even though I won't use it, I think I'll still look into it!



Because there are so many interruptions, it doesn't seem like the OS is doing much at all, leaving everything to the user to decide. Maybe there should be something as simple as a slider to regulate how much user intervention in the system is desired, as well as one for the general level of security the OS should assume, with an Advanced Options section for users who want to customise.



ArcticStones · 02-21-2007, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pro Grape


	You made your decision prematurely because at the time Vista was still in beta. You can't go around saying software is broken after you tried it only while it was in production.

I think Scneb has the right of it.

And without presuming to put words in Carlos’ mouth, I think he referred to Microsoft’s broken development strategy.. We could, after all, see the foundations they were laying quite early on. And just as something has always been rotten at the very core of Windows (enough to allow 114,000 viruses amongst other things!), so there appeared to be fundamental flaws in the very foundation of this new structure being formed in Redmond.

In other words, Carlos’ decision even then was well considered -- and hardly premature.

-- ArcticStones
.

tlarkin · 02-21-2007, 09:12 AM

Some features that I wished they would have implemented that are not in vista:

1) EFI support
2) better file system access by third party
3) A better OS installer

CAlvarez · 02-21-2007, 11:23 AM

Quote:


	You made your decision prematurely because at the time Vista was still in beta. You can't go around saying software is broken after you tried it only while it was in production.

Of course I've used a production copy. As Schneb pointed out, what I was saying was that I saw the direction it was going, and it was bad. I don't expect beta software to be flawless; I expect it to reflect the intentions of the developer and the general feel of the product; both of which were and still are horribly bad. This is the point that Arctic covered well also; both development strategy and the end goal with the product.

I find it very interesting to note the large proliferation of Apple laptops among my peers, visible at any conference or gathering. These are guys that work with Windows in a professional capacity, but as I say:
1. I don't want to have to fix my own stuff so I can get work done.
2. When the Windows network goes all to hell, someone has to have a working machine to fix it.

tlarkin · 03-01-2007, 03:47 PM

well i offically have vista on my desktop at work now....

ArcticStones · 03-01-2007, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlarkin


	well i offically have vista on my desktop at work now...

Is that yellow Post-It just as official?

ArcticStones · 03-01-2007, 06:24 PM

.
And on a related note:

"Install Vista, kiss Internet goodbye."

tlarkin · 03-01-2007, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcticStones


	Is that yellow Post-It just as official?

LOL yup I put it there myself to remind me, that I can always just reboot into Linux......

The installer is a huge pice of crap. I had no custom partitioning options at all. I can only imagine this is because MS completely changed the boot strap in Vista. There is no more boot.ini file, its an exe file now (like bdd.exe or something can't remember) so I was forced to completely wipe out my perfectly working xp install to install vista. Now, since it took like 10 minutes for it boot off CD and load everything up I didn't feel like rebooting off the vista disc again so I just wiped it.

Instead I just downloaded and installed MS VPC 2007 and will just run a virtual machine of wndows xp on my vista desktop until all the compatibility problems are fixed.

The disk utility made me mad because for one, I have never used a MS boot loader. I have always pretty much used GRUB.

For any of you that want to install vista on a seperate partition on a known good working install of windows xp, download Gparted Live (http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php) and just create a new partition and try the installer that way. However, I have read that vista really botches dual booting installs.

My vista box actually has suse 10.2 loaded on it on a seperate HD, so I can always just boot into Linux and run whatever legacy app I needed via wine for the most part.

fazstp · 03-04-2007, 02:23 PM

On another related note

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6330913.stm

Jay Carr · 03-05-2007, 02:36 AM

I hate to say it, but with how Apple's advertising department usually likes to work... I have to wonder if Apple is doing this on purpose to highlight Vista's problems. Frankly I don't disagree with them, but if it's true...that's just a bit underhanded for my taste.

ArcticStones · 03-05-2007, 04:35 AM

.
The series of PC / Mac commercials are perhaps the first time Apple has really gone for the jugular. And I think it’s high time to really highlight the fundamental problems of an inferior OS. With the humour and light-hearted ridicule they embrace, they truly are memorable and designed to influence users’ purchasing choices.

I have not seen a convincing argument for iTunes/Vista incompatibility being an example of Apple sabotage. It’s pretty well known that Microsoft has never pursued a policy of timely transparency in regards to providing third-party software developers (and especially competing ones) with the information they require to ensure seemless integration of their products with Windows.

In fact there are more than a couple of court orders and lawsuits that document the opposite. So most likely this is at least partly Microsoft’s fault.

Apple may be choosing to make a point. But underhanded?
They are saying a new version of iTunes will be available in "a few weeks".
Underhanded would be to say "a new version of iTunes will be released around the same time as Microsoft Office 2007 for Mac".

cwtnospam · 03-05-2007, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcticStones


	Underhanded would be to say "a new version of iTunes will be released around the same time as Microsoft Office 2007 for Mac".

I'm thinking it wouldn't be underhanded to say that the new version will be released around the same time as Access for the Mac, or when MS produces a fully functional Mac client for Exchange. Not that I want to use either, but I know there are people who do.

fazstp · 03-05-2007, 01:36 PM

One could also make the point that delayed compatibility of iTunes could leave a user looking for another player like the Zune...

ThreeDee · 03-05-2007, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcticStones


	...OSX 10.6 Leopard leapfrogs waaayyy beyond Vista...

Uhm... <cough>

tlarkin · 03-05-2007, 04:13 PM

well i think it may be official but I am not totally 100% on this. Vista breaks file and print sharing with other platforms. I can no longer connect to any mac share on my vista box. Vista uses SMB2 which has imporved security settings and such, and is probably the problem. The problem is not that I can not connect to the share. I can connect to it just fine. The problem is I can not authenticate to a share. If I run Windows Xp to the same share it works like it was suppose to. So, I ruled out user error on the username password part on myself.

schneb · 03-06-2007, 11:50 AM

The more I hear about Vista, the more I get Dilbert.
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/umed...4d56db44ae5cb6

02-20-2007, 07:13 PM	#104
tlarkin League Commissioner Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 11,352	actually exchange 2007 is pretty nice too. MS finally went back to thinking about what an email server should do. They view it as a commodity(sp?) now and think that your email server should just work, the same way you can just pick up your phone and it works. Setting quotas, rules, etc for mailboxes and users is very easy and straight forward now. Exchange itself runs real smooth, even when its just a virtual machine. All the demos today were done on virtual machines on laptops, and all of them ran pretty well. Another cool new feature in exchange is virtual firewalls on your network. Lets say you own a consulting company, and you have two consultants helping out two major corporations. Consultant A is working for UPS, and Consultant B is working for Fed Ex, so naturally both companies would not want Consultants A and B talking to each other. You can now set up a virtual firewall to block emails from people in your internal network. You can set the rules to block all emails except emails containing certain text or words or whatever. So, like if the subject line says, emergency it could pass through the firewall. Or if you don't like someone in your office just block all email from them Vista actually offers a lot of good new features, however it also is not worth the cash for the upgrade in some perspectives. Some of the added security seems very well thought out in one hand, and in the other hand I see where it could also have side effects. Either way, no one will fully know until vista has been out for a while. Some of the new features it offers I was unaware of, and some of them also come in packages, meaning you have to buy a server side application to go with it. WDS (windows deployment server) is pretty bad ass when it comes to deploying applications and the OS itself, and it makes it very easy to manage your images, update your images, etc. Some of the new security features, you know the ones that Apple make fun of, actually could come in handy depending on what your company does. Last edited by tlarkin; 02-20-2007 at 07:18 PM.

02-21-2007, 01:57 AM	#105
Pro Grape Triple-A Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: British Columbia, Canada Posts: 65	 Hm, Exchange sounds interesting... even though I won't use it, I think I'll still look into it!  Because there are so many interruptions, it doesn't seem like the OS is doing much at all, leaving everything to the user to decide. Maybe there should be something as simple as a slider to regulate how much user intervention in the system is desired, as well as one for the general level of security the OS should assume, with an Advanced Options section for users who want to customise.  Last edited by Pro Grape; 02-21-2007 at 02:00 AM.

03-01-2007, 03:47 PM	#109
tlarkin League Commissioner Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 11,352	well i offically have vista on my desktop at work now.... Last edited by ArcticStones; 03-01-2007 at 06:00 PM.

03-01-2007, 06:24 PM	#111
ArcticStones Moderator Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Norway Posts: 3,152	. And on a related note: "Install Vista, kiss Internet goodbye." __________________ . "You say this gadget of yours is for ordinary people. What on earth would ordinary people want with computers?" HP executive to Steve Wozniak

03-05-2007, 02:36 AM	#114
Jay Carr Hall of Famer Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Springfield, MO, USA Posts: 3,110	I hate to say it, but with how Apple's advertising department usually likes to work... I have to wonder if Apple is doing this on purpose to highlight Vista's problems. Frankly I don't disagree with them, but if it's true...that's just a bit underhanded for my taste. __________________ ~ Long ago I was called Zalister, keep that in mind when reading responses to my old posts.

02-21-2007, 09:12 AM	#107
tlarkin League Commissioner Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 11,352	Some features that I wished they would have implemented that are not in vista: 1) EFI support 2) better file system access by third party 3) A better OS installer

03-04-2007, 02:23 PM	#113
fazstp MVP Join Date: May 2004 Location: Melbourne, AUS Posts: 1,576	On another related note http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6330913.stm

03-05-2007, 04:35 AM	#115
ArcticStones Moderator Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Norway Posts: 3,152	. The series of PC / Mac commercials are perhaps the first time Apple has really gone for the jugular. And I think it’s high time to really highlight the fundamental problems of an inferior OS. With the humour and light-hearted ridicule they embrace, they truly are memorable and designed to influence users’ purchasing choices. I have not seen a convincing argument for iTunes/Vista incompatibility being an example of Apple sabotage. It’s pretty well known that Microsoft has never pursued a policy of timely transparency in regards to providing third-party software developers (and especially competing ones) with the information they require to ensure seemless integration of their products with Windows. In fact there are more than a couple of court orders and lawsuits that document the opposite. So most likely this is at least partly Microsoft’s fault. Apple may be choosing to make a point. But underhanded? They are saying a new version of iTunes will be available in "a few weeks". Underhanded would be to say "a new version of iTunes will be released around the same time as Microsoft Office 2007 for Mac". __________________ . "You say this gadget of yours is for ordinary people. What on earth would ordinary people want with computers?" HP executive to Steve Wozniak

03-05-2007, 01:36 PM	#117
fazstp MVP Join Date: May 2004 Location: Melbourne, AUS Posts: 1,576	One could also make the point that delayed compatibility of iTunes could leave a user looking for another player like the Zune...

03-05-2007, 04:13 PM	#119
tlarkin League Commissioner Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 11,352	well i think it may be official but I am not totally 100% on this. Vista breaks file and print sharing with other platforms. I can no longer connect to any mac share on my vista box. Vista uses SMB2 which has imporved security settings and such, and is probably the problem. The problem is not that I can not connect to the share. I can connect to it just fine. The problem is I can not authenticate to a share. If I run Windows Xp to the same share it works like it was suppose to. So, I ruled out user error on the username password part on myself.

03-06-2007, 11:50 AM	#120
schneb MVP Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Redlands, CA Posts: 2,300	The more I hear about Vista, the more I get Dilbert. http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/umed...4d56db44ae5cb6 __________________ Tour Israel and Jordan via CD-ROM