$230 CND projected :] That’s pretty much exactly the same as XP.
I have a hard time trusting the “this has more security fixes than that” as an actual statement of being better. If you fix a problem that you never would have come across, does it matter? They can fix all the holes in IE they want and force me to download them, but it won’t make me any more secure if I use a different browser. I think security is much too obscure an idea to determine by # of fixes. My idea of security is just “Don’t do anything stupid.” and it has kept me from ever getting a virus on win2k in 7 years. I don’t want fixes that add overhead or hassles for situations that only an idiot would put themselves in. I have heard all kinds of complaints about constantly having to enter a password or something to change anything in Vista. Did they fix that on the one you tested or do you still have to deal with it?
The compatibility thing is what will force people to change to Vista as they did with win2k and XP. I am not really bashing Vista. I don’t think it is worth the price they will put on it though.
I didn’t come across this password problem, though I don’t doubt it’s a thing that you can set. I’m all for blocking the computer, or going to the welcome screen instead, which will only require a password for people to get back into their accounts. As for security, okay, good point there too - and all the really important flaws get fixed independent of version (like the jpeg exploit), also you can delegate part of the security to anti-virus and anti-spyware software.
Eh. I’ll wait until I’m ready to get a new computer.
I’m perfectly happy with my XP SP2, I don’t plan on upgrading any too soon.
Yeah, this is something to wait on. Definately not getting it until either a new comp, or at least a significant enough an upgrade that it practically is a new computer.
I’ll probably end up downloading it, trying it, and going back to my unattended XP install :x
Ren is to Windows what Wertigon is to Linux.
Maybe Ren will do what Wert did.
You know what I mean.
holds up a crucifix Keep the evil thing away from me ;-;
Is it someting I missed from the time I was away?
I’m in the need of a new computer as the laptop I’m using now is over five years old. I know it’s going to be expensive, but I’m willing to spend about $2000 for my next desktop, just so I can have decent graphics card in it so I can play some decent games on it.
I just started a new job and when I got to my desk, I discovered my computer there was lightning fast compared to home. I looked at the specs and it had a 3 Ghz and a gig of RAM. It made me cry.
I bought one just like that, with a 128 mb GeForce Fx 5200 for some 500 dollars, Xero. If you’re going to spend that much in a computer you’ll have to rise your standards by a huge lot.
Where Ren because everywhere I’ve looked they’re about $1000. Best Buy had one on sale for $700 but I didn’t get it because they recommended that I wait for Vista and DirectX 10 if I wanted it to play games.
Idealy I’d like a comuter with a 3 Ghtz processor, 2 GB of RAM, and a 256 MB graphics card. I know I could get one much cheaper if I built it from cratch, but I’m not mechanically inclined enough to do that. I think I’m just going to wait for the inital rush after Vista is released, and hope for a slight price drop or a good sale first. Until this laptop just totally dies on me, I can wait.
I live in Brazil, too far away to recommend you stores XD Also I bought it in separate parts, and I didn’t buy a monitor (I’m using one from my previous computer). Though I did throw in lots of extras, like an exhaust fan with neon lights, a keyboard with lots of extra buttons and a USB extension on it and a wireless mouse.
Building a computer from scratch makes you have warranty for each part separately, which sucks compared to warranty of a computer as a whole, and there’s the part where you have to connect everything, which most people dislike (I actually love it). But it does such a huge cut on the cost of a computer that you could consider buying the parts and having someone else do the assembling job for you.
You wouldn’t. That’d leave you with a Pentium4, which is outperformed by a 2.0GHz AMD X2 or a 1.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo.
Thanks for the advice Nul. Truth be told, I’m not familiar with the capabilites of dual processors. I’ll have to do more research on them.
2000 bucks would get you a very powerful desktop, if not a very powerful laptop in the States. Ren must’ve bought his vid card a long time ago because you can get 256mb cards for less than that now.
That’s my plan Sin. I like my computers to last a while, and at least a desktop can be upgraded unlike a laptop.
Indeed my card is somewhat old. As for the processor, there are processors with clocks over 3 Ghz which are dual core’d, so you can go for them. Mine is an Intel 3.06 dual with Hyperthreading, plus it’s a 64 bits processor. If you think I’m picky, that was actually one of the cheapest ones I could find - though I can easily find 2.8 Ghz single core processors, most stores today will only sell 64 bits, 3.3 Ghz or higher processors (stats for Intel ones).
I like Intel better than AMD because they tend to have less heating problems. My two previous computers had AMD chips. The older one had a processor burn, the other one still remains but has temperature issues (ie, I’ve put a really big cooler on it and it still gets way too hot sometimes).