|
GreatOak wrote: The security won't be there
Oh it will be there. So there that everytime you run notepad you have to click Yes on 5 different security dialogs. Then you have to do it again when you open a text file...
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland
FeedHenry needs you
eh, stop bugging me about it, give it a couple of days, see what happens.
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if any of those dialog boxes will have a checkbox labeled "Yes, god damn it, yes, for all eternity!" 
--
This episode performed entirely by sock puppets
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was only for one beta, a number of months ago. User Account Control has been significantly improved since then, and while its still a little annoying, its certainly more secure than any previous version of windows. The deal with security is that its ALWAYS a tradeoff...you can't have your shiny secure cake and eat it to...either its behind the glass and vaccume sealed or not. The problem with Windows security isn't really the security, its everyone who bitches about it regardless of how good or bad it is.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to whole-heartedly agree on this point. I was extremely excited when I got my hands on Longhorn Alpha back near the beginning of last year. Despite the MONSTROUS memory consumption of WinFS (my test system booted using 800 megs of ram, out of 1gig total), it was REALLY REALLY COOL. WinFS was the only thing that made me want Vista in the first place, followed closely by the original sidebar. When they dropped both features, I pretty much made the decision to wait on an upgrade until whatever version of windows follows Vista.
I have a beta version of WinFS running on the XP box I'm typing this message on, and its been much improved since the original Longhorn Alpha. Its still got a LONG way to go, however. Something to be said for Microsoft over Oracle is that at least Microsoft is actively trying to implement a relational file system. Even if it doesn't get released with Vista, they have a base of code to work with, and even if its only released in pieces here and there, eventually we will have a fully relational file system in Windows. My only hope is that "eventually" is sooner rather than much much later. :\
|
|
|
|
|
Please any body send me Vista Screen shots. I am eager to c it. I don't know how different it looks.
Virtual Directory Name
Create a Virtual Director
Virtual Directory Name
Create a Virtual Director
Virtual Directory Name
Create a Virtual Director
|
|
|
|
|
Check this out.[^]
I've found a living worth working for, but I haven't found work worth living for.
<marquee>![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
![Jig | [Dance]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/jig.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm hoping to avoid the new telly-tubby experience.
If they can just keep delaying it until after I retire, then I never will be forced to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
Back in '94, two of my brothers and i scraped together enough cash to finally buy a decent video card. It was great. Fat VESA interface, lots of memory, fast vector acceleration. Except, the OS/2 drivers didn't support the accelerated drawing, or even non-banked memory access. It was pitiful. Win3.11 supported it all. Win3.11 wasn't actually useful for anything, but it sure was exciting to watch how fast those Solitaire cards were drawn.
Later, i bought Win95. It was faster than OS/2 and more useful than Win3.11. I could play games in it. (i didn't - i rebooted into DOS to play games, because they crashed less and appreciated the extra memory... but i could have, if i'd been insane.) Best of all, Win95 supported the vector acceleration and non-banked memory access! Now i could watch Solitaire and Pinball draw quickly...
Fast forward five years. Win2000 is out, and the video card i'm using supports a whole lot more than simple vector acceleration. It does 3D rendering, shading, texture mapping, alpha blending, and even (really slow, really sh*tty) anti-aliasing. And Win2000 supports... none of this. Windows still draw as slowly as in Win98 (unless you count the time it took to reboot Win98, in which case Win2k refreshed aprox. 11 hundred gazillion times faster). Then WinXP came out, with all sorts of new eye candy, and no support for hardware rendering of this eye candy whatsoever. It was quickly followed by a new drawing library named "GDI+", which supported 2D rendering, shading, texture mapping, alpha blending, and even (really slow, kinda sh*tty) anti-aliasing. No hardware supported for that either. But, soon, there would be a new OS, an OS named "Vista", and it would take advantage of my spiffy new hardware. And, in this Win95 for the new Millennium, i'll be able to not only run games, but even editors, and compilers.
Not that i would. I mean, that'd be insane. VS2005 chews up enough memory all by itself. But i could, if i completely lose what little sanity i still cling to.
And i'll bet Solitaire looks just awesome...
|
|
|
|
|
You are so wasted in your current job.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
You are so wasted in your current job.
That even works as a double-entendre
'--8<------------------------
Ex Datis:
Duncan Jones
Merrion Computing Ltd
|
|
|
|
|
Heh, yeah... i mean, i'm even more wasted on my days off...
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: You are so wasted in your current job.
I was thinking the same thing.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
What I'm not looking forward to is buying a new machine capable of running it. It's not that I don't like new machines, but I know even with the faster machine, the new OS will run slower than the old machine, with the old OS. 
- S
50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
|
|
|
|
|
My company just converted from VS2003 to VS2005. Something that seemed like it should have been straightforward... ya right.
I can only image how much fun we will have moving to Vista. That should keep a few of us gainfully employed for awhile.
Pooty
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone likes Job Security... I know I do, and that would be the only thing I would like to thank Microsoft & computers in general for. Because if I know something for sure software & hardware will eventually break somehow and somewhere. 
|
|
|
|
|
I have been using Beta 2 since it came out. No major problems at all. No BSOD till now. I do have some minor annoyances but apart from that everything is great. Actually, it is an ultimate Beta machine where I have beta versions of several different products: office, minefield, LINQ. Once in a while when I boot back to XP and XP looks primitive.
My Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote: I have been using Beta 2 since it came out. No major problems at all. No BSOD till now. I do have some minor annoyances but apart from that everything is great. Actually, it is an ultimate Beta machine where I have beta versions of several different products: office, minefield, LINQ. Once in a while when I boot back to XP and XP looks primitive.
The good thing is it works for you. The bad thing is that you are in a minority
Regards,
Nish
|
|
|
|
|
You should keep a 486 system around running Windows 3.1, just so you don't lose your perpective.
I am just getting used to looking at allt he extra crap XP puts on my screen.
Now I have to adjust again 
I've seen better runs in my shorts! - Patches O'Houlihan
|
|
|
|
|
For me too, well almost that is. I sometimes get noise through my speakers when playing mp3 songs. Its a kind of cracking noise, I think it has something to do with the drivers. Soundblaster drivers are still in the beta stage too 
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
|
|
|
|
|
WillemM wrote: Soundblaster drivers are still in the beta stage too
And not only on Vista
modified 12-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously I am tried of hearing about it. My only hopes are:
1) That they don't force everyone to upgrade
2) My software will still function properly (with only a few changes)
It took me 5 years to move to XP, and by the looks of Vista it will be no different.
That's all just me
|
|
|
|
|
diilbert wrote: That they don't force everyone to upgrade
Not likely, since most of the stuff will be available for XP. I think originally that wasn't the plan. Developers stuck to Win2k (of which I'm sure there are a lot) will miss out though. So they will be forced to upgrade!
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
And I just happen to be one of those developers that still use 2k for 50% of my development :p
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a contractor so I typically encounter a number of Windows OSes for development - even Win 98 three years ago. And a painful experience that was!
At home I have a laptop with Win2k and a desktop with XP. Fortunately that meant I could have VS 2005 on both. Won't be so lucky for the next VS though - but then I expect my laptop will be past its sell by date anyway.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
