That is not an anti-Vista article. I think rockz's point in posting that link was to say that even if there is something you find annoying about Vista, you can fix it.

I've been using 7 since January, and Vista before that since the February. I'd categorize both the other way. Vista is leaps and bounds better than Xp, and 7 is a decent improvement of Vista. Besides the new UI, which is a great, there isn't much new. There are performance boosts, and those are great, but Vista wasn't really the slow hog it was made out to be. Libraries are nifty, but they aren't exactly revolutionary. Homegroup looks to be useful, although I haven't actually played with it.

thats funny cause the biggest security hole IS a RETARD. that would be referring to mindless bandwagonners such as yourself btw.

Windows. XP > Mac > Vista

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Aug 20 2009, 3:03 pm by Pyro682.

Windows is safe and secure? Don't make me laugh. It has freaking DirectX! This gives programs essentially direct control over the hardware, creating an easy target for viruses and causes many crashes. This bypasses Windows' protections. Sure, it's a little faster, at the cost of reliability. There is a reason banks run Unix, it is stable and secure. Windows-DirectX is fairly stable, too, but still worse than OS X. The main thing is that OS X is based on Unix and BSD, and Windows is based on the unreliable, slow, DOS. Also, Windows 2000 > Windows XP.

If you need a college notebook, this realy depends on what you need. If you need things like AutoCAD and specialized software, get a copy of 2000 (if you can get one, or 7, if it's any good), and Boot-Camp it on a Macbook Pro with OS X. When you need an app that OS X won't run, you can fire up 2000. It will be slower, less reliable, and virus-prone, so whenever you don't need it, boot up OS X.

Windows hasn't been DOS based for 10 years.

Stop spreading misinformation.

Oh, yeah, it's based on NT now, right? Sorry, I still just think DOS.

Where are you getting your information? It's so comically skewed and incorrect I don't even know how to respond.

Alright, you thinking Windows is DOS based, is like us all thinking Mac OS X is based on Mac Classic.

I can't even believe the sand that would ravage your vagina if we made a claim like that.

Nonetheless, his point stands, Windows is based on a much older system, and unlike other OSes who completely remake their OS from the ground-up, Windows simply places a shell around the base of the previous OS and fancies it up, adding a few more things, and only minimally changing the older code, hence Window's virus problem, because older viruses can still target newer OSes. Of course, both Windows 7 and Vista are based off of XP, rather than 7 being built around Vista, so there's a bit less code being reused.

Heh. Well...you've got me there.

I'm out. I just lost the thread.

somehow I missed this response. It's to prove that vista isn't the heaping ball of garbage Apple made it out to be. There are some networking problems with XP, though. If you logon as a local admin on Vista, you are also a domain admin. Kinda gay, and I don't know how to fix it.

No it doesn't.

Linux and UNIX are both older than Windows NT.

Yes, but both have been rebuilt from a smaller starting point between OSes, Windows hasn't been built up from the bottom in a much longer time than UNIX. Not to mention UNIX was simply a better OS design in the first place, it was just never carried to the next level.

what exactly are you referring to here? considering the principle complaint against vista was that it was built so differently than xp..

He doesn't know what he's talking about.

XP is based on NT 5.1, Vista is NT 6.0, and 7 is NT 6.1

OS X is based on modern tech, as well. BSD and UNIX are both updated quite frequently. Also, the basic code for them is better than NT. I just realized that's it's still called New Technology even though it's 15 years old.

Define better.

What is inherently better than them?

Oh boy. Criticizing an OS just because of the marketing terms is retarded. Windows is also updated, the latest update is called Windows 7, and it will be patched frequently. I could write a program today and another tomorrow. Tomorrow's could be poorly written and filled with security holes. Age is not a metric for security or supieriority.

Prove the basic code is better. You aren't a coder, and Windows is closed source anyway. You've made yet another baseless, uninformed argument based off of some blog you read by someone just as stupid as you.

Every single claim you have made has been debunked. You subsequently modify your argument or make a new one. New arguments are debunked. Rinse and repeat. This is getting old.

They never completely rebuild NT, it's always slight modifications, "Windows simply places a shell around the base of the previous OS and fancies it up, adding a few more things, and only minimally changing the older code" I didn't say Windows places a shell around the previous OS, I said around the base of the previous OS, in this case, NT, they haven't redone NT much, they just upgrade it.


For a simple example, pipelining, Windows doesn't allow you to take output from one command and immediately insert it into the next, you have to have a stop in between, which significantly decreases speed. UNIX has countless small improvements over Windows, little additions that add up.


A constantly updated program gets bulkier and slower than one that is started with the complete goal in mind. I've seen this from programming myself, I'll begin writing a program, with some plans, and half way through realize a few more additions that could improve it, I then have to do sloppy insertions of them into my code, and eventually it gets very unorganized, and not as efficient as possible.
Starting over, knowing now what you want to do completely, you can write it properly to begin with, taking up less code, and being much more efficient. Ask Heimdal, I'm sure that with now starting StarForge: Ultimate from scratch, he can already see how much of a better editor it is going to be, because he can start with the initial goal in mind, build a base good enough to hold the entire tower of the program.