other problems are in typing it. XP is at least easy to type because you can hit the keys with alternating motions (Left-Right). Windows Vista is bad because the shortened version, WV is Left-Left.
Vista is almost faster to type than WV.
Random ChaosActually Carefully-selected Order in disguise
Well, I think I understand why they changed the name...can you see an ad for it advertising:
"Do you have your Microsoft Longhorn yet?" right after a viagra ad.
ShadowDancerWhen I say, "Why aye, gadgie," in my heart I say, "Och aye, laddie."London, UK
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by JackN [/i]
[B]Throws a full beer can at Mundane for dragging up this thread...[/B][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Random Chaos [/i]
[B]Well, I think I understand why they changed the name...can you see an ad for it advertising:
"Do you have your Microsoft Longhorn yet?" right after a viagra ad. [/B][/QUOTE]
They removed the "My" prefix from it too. So My Computer is now Computer. My Longhorn doesn't sound too proper :D. Vista is pretty silly. Vista BTW means view in spanish. Get it, Window View? Hehe, pretty stupid.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
[B]Longhorn would kick butt if brought out a bit earlier, like around their original release date. But I think that there is a good chance it will be a bit behind if it takes them as long as it looks like it will take them to get it out. [/B][/QUOTE]
What would happen if they didn't? They can take their sweet time and even if the release date was 2010 I bet that Windows 2000 and XP would be running on 90% of all computers. I wonder what exactly MS bases their OS release dates around. Heck, most people complain they release unnecessary new operating systems too frequently.
After eating pigs-brain yesterday, Im getting more and more convinced that I should be a vegetarian..
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Vorlons in my Head [/i]
[B]What would happen if they didn't? They can take their sweet time and even if the release date was 2010 I bet that Windows 2000 and XP would be running on 90% of all computers. I wonder what exactly MS bases their OS release dates around. Heck, most people complain they release unnecessary new operating systems too frequently. [/B][/QUOTE]
Firstly, that comment was made a long time ago. Pay attention to dates in threads that have been dragged from the abyss.
Secondly, it's called "technological advances." Computer technology advances fast, so you do need to have regular updates to your OS to keep up. Sure, you could run 98 on a computer today and be mostly happy, but it would be lacking in many areas. The same goes for XP. It does everything I want right now, but in 3 or 4 years I suspect it will be completely out of date. Hell, parts of it are way behind the technological edge right now. The problem with Longhorn, however, is that they've dumped all but one of the major technological advances it was supposed to have. :)
Thirdly, the frequency of their operating system releases isn't too often, the problem is that you have to pay too much each time to keep up. :) With Longhorn in particular, it simply won't be worth the cost.
Yeah I'm aware of the original date of posting but I think it still applies. Even today Win2K/XP could be dragged out for several years more regardless of Longhorn being worth it or not. Just look at NT4. Its old, outdated and annoying but it won't die :)
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
[B]Firstly, that comment was made a long time ago. Pay attention to dates in threads that have been dragged from the abyss.
Secondly, it's called "technological advances." Computer technology advances fast, so you do need to have regular updates to your OS to keep up. Sure, you could run 98 on a computer today and be mostly happy, but it would be lacking in many areas. The same goes for XP. It does everything I want right now, but in 3 or 4 years I suspect it will be completely out of date. Hell, parts of it are way behind the technological edge right now. The problem with Longhorn, however, is that they've dumped all but one of the major technological advances it was supposed to have. :)
Thirdly, the frequency of their operating system releases isn't too often, the problem is that you have to pay too much each time to keep up. :) With Longhorn in particular, it simply won't be worth the cost. [/B][/QUOTE]
Don't forget that since the NT platform was adopted, it's been made a good deal easier to generally port fancy features from one OS to the other, making it a bit harder to obsolete XP than, say, XP obsoleting 98.
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
Yes. Of course, it is important to remember the difference between making a platform obselete and it simply being out of date.
Also, amusing:
[url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/24/0350245&from=rss[/url]
Didn't take long. :D
Biggles: Indeed, there is a difference, but I'm worried that MS is going to be trying its damndest to forcibly obsolete XP, first by targeting the gamers and 3d folk (most likely of any group to change) with one of the two next major revisions of DirectX.
Reaver/Simmonds: ...
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
Comments
The new name is "Microsoft Windows Vista"
[B]*Slaps Mundane for bumping a 2 year old thread* [/B][/QUOTE]
There was no need to create a new one :P
;)
Throws a full beer can at Mundane for dragging up this thread...
:p
Vista is almost faster to type than WV.
"Do you have your Microsoft Longhorn yet?" right after a viagra ad.
[B]Throws a full beer can at Mundane for dragging up this thread...[/B][/QUOTE]
what a waste of beer:rolleyes:
- Φ
[B]Well, I think I understand why they changed the name...can you see an ad for it advertising:
"Do you have your Microsoft Longhorn yet?" right after a viagra ad. [/B][/QUOTE]
They removed the "My" prefix from it too. So My Computer is now Computer. My Longhorn doesn't sound too proper :D. Vista is pretty silly. Vista BTW means view in spanish. Get it, Window View? Hehe, pretty stupid.
[B]Longhorn would kick butt if brought out a bit earlier, like around their original release date. But I think that there is a good chance it will be a bit behind if it takes them as long as it looks like it will take them to get it out. [/B][/QUOTE]
What would happen if they didn't? They can take their sweet time and even if the release date was 2010 I bet that Windows 2000 and XP would be running on 90% of all computers. I wonder what exactly MS bases their OS release dates around. Heck, most people complain they release unnecessary new operating systems too frequently.
Always avoided that particular kind of cheddar too...
:p :D
[B]What would happen if they didn't? They can take their sweet time and even if the release date was 2010 I bet that Windows 2000 and XP would be running on 90% of all computers. I wonder what exactly MS bases their OS release dates around. Heck, most people complain they release unnecessary new operating systems too frequently. [/B][/QUOTE]
Firstly, that comment was made a long time ago. Pay attention to dates in threads that have been dragged from the abyss.
Secondly, it's called "technological advances." Computer technology advances fast, so you do need to have regular updates to your OS to keep up. Sure, you could run 98 on a computer today and be mostly happy, but it would be lacking in many areas. The same goes for XP. It does everything I want right now, but in 3 or 4 years I suspect it will be completely out of date. Hell, parts of it are way behind the technological edge right now. The problem with Longhorn, however, is that they've dumped all but one of the major technological advances it was supposed to have. :)
Thirdly, the frequency of their operating system releases isn't too often, the problem is that you have to pay too much each time to keep up. :) With Longhorn in particular, it simply won't be worth the cost.
[B]Firstly, that comment was made a long time ago. Pay attention to dates in threads that have been dragged from the abyss.
Secondly, it's called "technological advances." Computer technology advances fast, so you do need to have regular updates to your OS to keep up. Sure, you could run 98 on a computer today and be mostly happy, but it would be lacking in many areas. The same goes for XP. It does everything I want right now, but in 3 or 4 years I suspect it will be completely out of date. Hell, parts of it are way behind the technological edge right now. The problem with Longhorn, however, is that they've dumped all but one of the major technological advances it was supposed to have. :)
Thirdly, the frequency of their operating system releases isn't too often, the problem is that you have to pay too much each time to keep up. :) With Longhorn in particular, it simply won't be worth the cost. [/B][/QUOTE]
Don't forget that since the NT platform was adopted, it's been made a good deal easier to generally port fancy features from one OS to the other, making it a bit harder to obsolete XP than, say, XP obsoleting 98.
Also, amusing:
[url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/24/0350245&from=rss[/url]
Didn't take long. :D
Reaver/Simmonds: ...
[B]...Just look at NT4. Its old, outdated and annoying but it won't die :) [/B][/QUOTE]
Damn right it won't...
Still have 3 machines that use it, and no reason what so ever to waste money upgrading them to anything else.
(except if I could get LINUX to do what I need with them of course)
;)