It's Official: Microsoft Vista Sucks. Just ask Microsoft Execs.

Quote from blackjack007:

95 to nt was the best ms ever did. 95 was an unstable piece of crap. nt was a true 32-bit core o/s. it's still the foundation for 2000, xp and vista.

95 was fluff. it was a new ui over a crummy core.
More...

nt back then was only for professional use. Many of the games and apps do not work on nt.

And 3.1 to 95 is a HUGE upgrade. Dont you remember dealing with all the memory crap on 3.1 modifying the autoexec.bat etc for each different game so they would load... win95 solved most of those problems, standarized application compatibility and also made the gui a lot easier to use. (the gui layout is still the basis for all the windows version ever since)

I am not saying win95 is great, but COMPARING to the previous version 3.1. It was a big improvement.

----------------------------

to the person that asked why build your own pc when you can buy it.

1) cost, saves $500 on average every time for me
2) i get to pick the best hardware for each component instead of been forced to use old vendor stuff (CPU is not the only part of a pc that matters, far from it)
3) get to pick my own cool case and also control noise level. Good luck sticking that 5 lb heatsink in a dell
4) overclock, with the core2duo and modern motherboards. All it takes is 5 mins to overlock your cpu from say 2.6 to 3ghz. Which would costed another 100 bucks to buy

if you just buying a cheap pc to browse the net then get it from dell, but if you building an expensive one for gaming or trading, it's definitly better to build your own.

/geek off
 
Quote from newguy05:

...

if you just buying a cheap pc to browse the net then get it from dell, but if you building an expensive one for gaming or trading, it's definitly better to build your own.

/geek off [/B]
More...

Definitely agree on the "form follows function" as they say in architecture (of buildings). I advise the grandparents and non-power users who want e-mail and google to buy the $299 dell special. But for engineers, traders, etc. I honestly do not know of a company that makes a decent system at a fair price. The most expensive Dell system ($12k loaded?) is far inferior to what you can build for $2300, and they force you to have a system loaded with crap like AOL and intro virus definitions and lots of stuff that bogs down your system keeping you from doing what you paid an outrageously marked up price for the machine to do.

Performance and value = research building and build it!
Econoline/ grandma = buy the entry level Dell.
 
i recommend building your own only if you like that sorta stuff. honestly the only reason i do it is because it's interesting to me. i saved about $200 buliding a $1100 computer. if you don't like this techno stuff, it's a big headache, and there's a risk some components you buy aren't compatible, or the system is not stable, and you'll probably cut your finger on the case. at least with a brand-name like hp or dell, they've tested their system so instability is less likely.

but whatever you do, don't buy those really budget systems from dick's computer store where they build it using some crappy $30 motherboard and no-name memory. those suck ass. always use high quality parts.
 
Quote from Tums:

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/08/08/vista-security-rendered-usless

Vista security discovered to be even more usless

Another gaping hole presented by Microsoft
More...

Microsoft now reminds me of General Motors in the 80s;

Big, lumbering, top-heavy - in denial of the slow but steady share of the market being stripped away from it by everyone from Mozilla, Linux to Apple and others.

And Microsoft Vista is the Cadillac Cimarron of OS's.
 
on one of our computers i did dual boot and i'm pretty happy with it.
very easy,if you installing vista after xp on different partition.
for internet,work and old games-XP with internet enabled. for latest games with DX10-vista with NIC disabled.works for me. make sure you got enough RAM for vista. it uses from anywhere from 500 to 850 mb of RAM
 
I'd suggest 2G of ram for vista.

If you want to see what Vista should be capable of (the sp1 is similar speedwise to XP but I still like XP better) then try Windows Server 2008. It's up to 25% faster than either XP or Vista and has the vista look and feel. It does draw more heavily on Ram than vista or xp but in return you get consistently faster reopening of programs because its leaving more in memory -- very responsive.

The 64 bit version is excellent and when used with 64 bit java provides the most responsive tws platform I've seen.
 
Quote from kiwi_trader:

I'd suggest 2G of ram for vista.

If you want to see what Vista should be capable of (the sp1 is similar speedwise to XP but I still like XP better) then try Windows Server 2008. It's up to 25% faster than either XP or Vista and has the vista look and feel. It does draw more heavily on Ram than vista or xp but in return you get consistently faster reopening of programs because its leaving more in memory -- very responsive.

The 64 bit version is excellent and when used with 64 bit java provides the most responsive tws platform I've seen.
More...

Where are you getting 64 bit java for MS?
 
Its the RC for 1.6.0_10 (b28). I'd recommend this release for either 32bit or 64bit. It seems to be the best java yet.


Note that TWS didn't install on the 64bit version of b27 (claimed there was no java present) but I've raised this with IB so they can fix it. To get TWS to install you download the .jars that the web installer pulls down from IB and just pop them in the normal directory for tws. Or you just install it with 32bit java and then uninstall java and reinstall the 64bit version.

https://jdk6.dev.java.net/6u10ea.html
 
Quote from blackjack007:

i've used vista for several months, and xp for a few years. my suggestion is: if you already have xp, there's no need to upgrade to vista. if you're building a new comp, get vista. any popular product will have websites where customers bash it. the ipod has its share; does that mean you'd never get an ipod? xp used to have quite a few too.

there was a day people said the same about xp (that it sucked, it's a waste of money, everyone should stay with 2000, etc). it's a natural part of the product cycle. :D
More...

agreed. i'm running esignal, multicharts, and tradestation on 64-bit vista with indexing/aero graphics/etc., etc. shut off -- i.e., as stripped down as Vista can get -- and I'm unaware of any performance degradation. for the average non-geek, I think the fuss is now a non-issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top