Posts by Steve 102 publicly visible posts • joined 9 Jun 2008
Thanks for the replies everyone (other than Mark who can go do one)
Fair point that it's the implementation rather than the platform itself regarding having to mount file shares.
Though I do stick to my other two points... (YUM? Why not "Updater" or "AppMgr" if your aiming for the mainstream user...?)
It's a shame that OEM's are doing this, as it's tarnishing the name of Linux. Ironic that an open platform is this limited out the box when it comes from these particular builders....
As the title says - very interesting.
Whilst I have nothing against Linux (use it on a few servers I look after), the article does highlight the problems with it still.
Windows XP or Vista (possibly earlier versions too), you just go to "Network" and it lists the computers. Double click and you see the shares. Double click the share and you see all the files.
All in the GUI.
I'll check back in another couple of years to see if Linux has grown out of stupid names for it's applications, different apps that do the same thing depending on the distro and provides a GUI for the VAST majority of interaction the user will do.
P.S. Not flaming - just a bit disappointed that even something as simple as browsing to a fileshare on the Linux netbooks can still be so tricky for newbie users. One day soon the manufacturers will get it right and actually spend some time refining these sort of things and put their changes back into the community.
That's the first proper statement from an El Reg commenter regarding Vista that's actually reasonable! Thank you very much sir - I am impressed.
I disagree with your comment, to the point that if you show me a PC with a gig of RAM and anything above a P4 2.6Ghz chip then I'll run fine with Vista on it for the usual things like printing photo's, doing emails, spreadsheets, browsing the net, downloading porn etc. No sweat.
I'd recommend another gig if you are a bit more hardcore and want to be using Media Centre to record freeview, authoring DVD's or photoshopping.
Biggest problem is the crap that's installed. I counted 38 different "applications" Dell put onto a workstation for us. THAT's 38!!! First thing I do is wipe the box with the original install disk. After that's Vista's actually pretty good as long as your PC's been built in the last 3 years...
They seem to be mainly for the large-scale, new projects. Used to work as the Network Admin for a small web development company who specalised in .Net. Did a lot of banking system for some very big high street banks, as well as one of the worlds biggest food companies and various telecoms providers.
Can't really tell you what UML is - but it was used a lot in my previous place. Visual Studio Team System was a big deployment that the coders, projects manager and testers liked quite a lot. Was around 2006 we started doing work with the new features on SQL 2005 too.
All about the money really. The tools are normally pretty good, and have a lot of worth. However the resource to learn about them is quite high. Therefore it's only projects where the big money is that'll pay for devs to learn about them - as the overall aim of the tools is to reduce the cost of developing. More out, less in etc.
But yeah - I imagine it's probably used even more in the big, big projects normally based in India.
Um, why on earth would you care about the storage on the VM host? We're using 15k RPM RAID 1 disks at the moment, and I'm now thinking about booting directly from the FC SAN instead.
ESX doesn't require SSD's. The bottleneck isn't in the hypervisor itself AFAIK - as once the host has booted it's operating in RAM - plus the host OS (ESX) is so tiny it's sort of pointless using SSD's.
If your that bothered used ESXi (onboard) - sorted.
Real shame. Implemented MessageLabs at three companies of various sizes - including using their sister ISP Star.
Amazingly good service. Helpfuly and knowledgable staff (including helpdesk), superb reliability and does exactly what it says on the tin.
Very sad news that a company like Symantec is going to destroy what used to be a fantastic security provider.
... to stop anyone who decides to RDP or VPN (SSL/PPTP/IPSec) into their system of choice and then browse away. The fact that people can already download content first then play them offline hasn't caused issues before so why should accessing it live be any different?
Not the mention the fact that Club World offers "privacy" screens where you and your partner essentially has a private booth where people can see what you do.
The biggest problem won't be porn - it'll be the fact that it's impossible for anyone in cattle class to use it due to the stupid way the seats are crammed in (anyone over 5ft 5" can vouch for that) and the noise issues from the midgets that can squeeze a laptop onto their lap.
"An upgrade to a faster broadband package at no extra cost" - Since when was speed an issue? Uncapped, fibre with no metering or throttling then we can talk
"£1 off monthly broadband bills/£1 cashback per month" - You must be kidding me....
"A cut of advertising revenues" - Between the amount I'll actually get, and the fact that the small print will be so watertight the second Phorm stops making a huge profit I'll stop getting anything.
"A free premium technical support line" - Go phuck yourselves. 1st, I don't need one. 2nd, who doesn't have a techy friend? 3rd, how often do you actually need to contact tech support? 4th, my ISP has a geographical number as their main tech support line anyway.
"Free music download vouchers" - Indeed. And I presume it'll be with iTunes; and you really couldn't pay me to install that muck on my beloved system. Can't see BitTorrent Inc quaking in their boots over this.
"Free anti-virus software" - As others have said... AVG, ClamAV?
"Parental content controls" - Likes the ones BT offers or the ones built into Vista?
Pathetic.
... and unbias </sarcasm>
- As MS announced prior to Vista being launched, Windows will be updated on a 3 year cycle to help people that were done short by Software Assurance. This isn't some revelation or news - it's MS making things more predictable.
- There will be no new kernel - of course not. It gets updated from the previous version of Windows; as it always has been since the start of the NT line. There is little doubt that the Windows NT Kernel is good enough. Win2k8 Server is getting pretty good reviews yet it's the same kernel as Vista. (Well, technically Vista SP1 is using the same kernel as Windows Server)
- Removing applications and making the platform more modular should help reduce "bloat", and giving download links to the Live versions of the apps is no different that OEM's having AOL and Wanadoo links on their builds. Reducing the bloat and making the OS more component-based is something that the MS bashers have been asking for since Vista's launch
- The latest news from MS is that Windows 7 will be shipping around the first half of 2010, about 3 years from when Vista was released.
taskkill -f does the same thing as kill -9
Yeah, I remember the time when IIS had to be hidden behind *nix. Though I live in todays world where a Windows IIS server behind a firewall is fine. Good enough for Nestle, Vodafone, Alliance & Leicester and millions of other enterprises....
The kernel of Windows has been as secure and reliable as Linux for a good decade. Both Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 share the same kernel, however that's about as far as it goes.
However Server can be setup with no GUI, no IE, no explorer - nothing. Just IIS or AD or DNS etc. Hosting VM's on this would be fine - including Linux guests.
The advantage is also that you know when a patch is coming out for Windows, rather than it just appearing as it does on Linux.
Other than the above, you didn't actually make any other points so I guess this is as much as I can "bring it on"... :-S
The key and fundemental issue with a VPN is that a lot of public hotspots don't permit them (and are actively blocked - see various hotels, pubs etc.) and also with a basic solution like OpenVPN, you only get authentication about the user.... the device is an unknown unless using IPSec/L2TP. (Even then that's easy enough to move or copy to a second PC)
The SSL claim is nonsense. "Side-jacking" is pretty simple to get around - don't use cookies.
Just implemented a new Juniper SSL-VPN SA4500 cluster which uses some rather nice web GUI's for the users whilst employing RSA Auth, cache cleaning and host checking. (The latter two prior to credential entering!)
Additionally, the client laptops issued use TrueCrypt and various other technologies (GPO's, antivirus, management agent etc.) running to help with security - and of course the final addition is using Citrix once the users are connected via SSL to do the bulk of their work.
All over SSL.
The users love it as they are free from being blocked using VPN's, whilst having a more stable and user friendly setup. Plus we get a much better level of security and ease of management.
Everyone's a winner (other than the FD once we tell him how much it costs!)
Unless you've sold more than 100 items on your account PayPal will now place your money on "hold" until you either get positive feedback from the buyer or after 21 days....!?! WTF?!
eBay and PayPal are a complete joke and have forgotten what their target customers are. They are in the business of assisting trade, not telling me I maybe untrustworthy cause I haven't trade 100 times on their site.
Wasn't Vista released in 2006? Shipped on machines early 2007 from memory.
So what was Apple's score last year? If it's gone up from last year then wouldn't another conclusion be that Vista SP1 would be to blame rather than Vista?
I point this out as it's complete bollocks..... If Apple have improved things from customer service / pricing / spec then credit to them.
I'm sure iTunes and the iPod, as well as releasing a new handset onto the market in 2007 made no difference to this poll.......?! ;-)
"It’s not a huge surprise that just over half the enterprises we surveyed don’t yet have Windows Vista deployment plans...."
So nearly half do?
Seriously guys... wake up and smell the roses. Vista is being deployed. My last place deployed it after trialing it on a few sales PC's and the success resulted in every new PC using it. Some marketing droids are rabbiting about doing a new website and mentioned Vista at the "15-20% mark"... that's a damn sight better than Mac OS X or Linux - and they've had a bit longer to get the sales going. (Jesus - Linux is free and Vista is still kicking it's ass!)
At my current place they don't use a new OS until SP1, and as I've only been here 4 months I haven't got around to it.
Yet we've been buying Vista licences for the last year or so.
Guess what.... we're using XP on them.
But guess what else.... we're going to put them onto Vista in the next month or so as we've test it and it works pretty well. Better security model that XP, easier to administer and will please the sales team as it looks all shiny. (e.g. it was this or a mac! :-)
Businesses haven't got time to dick about with a new OS. They just want it to work. It's normally a good 18 months to 2 years before companies even LOOK at upgrading their platform.
Once again the linux lovers (read microsoft haters) moan and bitch about the latest product from the worlds most popular desktop OS vendor AGAIN - whilst praising the previous version AGAIN. Same bitching, same timescale, just the latest release.
And again, out of all of these comments from "IT Professionals", nobody has actually stated any reasons as to why it's oh so crap. Just the usual "i keep telling my mates how shite it is", "i downgraded 40,000,000 machines can it's so poor" and the ever original "apple/linux is better".
Guys - get a fucking life. It's an OS. It works. There are lots of drivers. Hardware for it is so cheap the homeless can get it and other than some wanky in-house VB app done on the cheap - what doesn't run on it? What the fuck is the problem?!
BTW Daniel: XP Pro is more expensive than Vista Bus. Quite a bit if you include inflation as well.
Oh - nice and original "V.I.S.T.A" there. Love it - Although I suspect your one of the many "professionals" unable to grasp the concept of UAC... Twat
$HOME, /usr/root/, bash, GUI, recompile, kernel, .conf, KDE, GNOME, XFCE.....
These are terms that users do not, should not and will not learn or recongnise. Users shouldn't need to wonder what desktop they are using. They should need to use a terminal EVER unless it's over the phone with guidence from tech support.
The Linux desktop is a joke. I hate Mac's, but I've got to hand it to Apple that they know how to make a good GUI. I personally feel that Windows is a good balance between technical ability and a usable GUI. None of them are perfect, but Linux is the least user friendly by far.
Config files, terminal and the such shouldn't ever be a concern of a user when doing something as trivial as installing Java or FF.
is going into developing countries and flogging it?
Um, how about they get working on STABLE fucking infrastructure and management tools first? Phase two is still about a reliable as Windows ME.
Don't get me wrong, the ESX HyperVisor is awesome and very stable - the the Infrastructure tools (I'm looking at you VirtualCentre) are so flakey it's a joke.
I've given up using it most the time. Easier and quicker to just use the web GUI or SSH.
Least with MS and Citrix playing catchup VMWare may start taking their tools a bit more seriously in the testing and patching department.
Get off your high horse.
The point Gary was trying to make is that casualties doesn't mean anything. A woman recently ran me off the road into the central reservation. I was doing about 75 - 80 at the time.
Whilst my car was written off, I had whiplash for a week. Yet I'll be included in the statistics which is pretty unfair.
Speed had nothing to do with it. (She pulled out in front of me without checking her mirrors!)
Speed doesn't kill - bad drivers kill. Passing a test doesn't make you a good driver. Judging the conditions of the road, traffic and weather and then making an assesment of how fast you can drive is the sensible thing to do.
However we have so many crap drivers who will blindly stick to limits or drive at 55mph to make sure they are "safe" that it's causing as many problems on the roads as the "racers" you seems to hate.
Doing 50mph on a dry, straight and quiet A-road at 6:30am is stupid, It just encourages people to overtake due to fustration. There is nothing wrong with doing 70 on the same stretch of road. You won't suddenly die as soon as the speedo needle goes past 59mph.
Crap drivers cause the accidents - not "speeding"
Forget the physical issues surrounding ADSL - but I can't even saturate my current 8Mbps circuit let along a fibre connection.
There is an issue at the moment with connectivity, but it's not really the last mile. It's the pricing structure used on the backhaul connections. ISPs are already starting to restrict, with caps, throttling or even temporary disconnects. The BT pipe needs to be cheaper or ideally stop charging on volume transfered over the pipe.
I'd personally welcome fibre, but if you've already got a 50Gb limit or so then why on earth are people spouting downloading/streaming HD movies and Video on Demand....? 2 HD movies a month is pretty much all you'll get on a 50Gb cap - which'll cost around £15.99 a month from Orange/Tiscali/AOL/O2. Rather go to the cinema thanks.
Accessibility should be key, not "open standards". As long as it's possible to interoperate with a particular protocol or "standard" then why should it matter if it's open or closed source?
Apple, Nokia and other 3rd parties have paid MS to use their self-developed ActiveSync protocol for push-email... where's the problem in this? It's a standard, it can be used by others, just that MS wants some cash for developing it - which is fair enough.
Unfortuatley not everyone has their day free to develop and innovate - some people do it for a living. As such they need to be paid. Why should one company do the coding only for another to use it for free? I agree that MS have been very immorale in the past and have closed out 3rd parties, but with recent regulation I think this is now being managed.
Open standards - yet.
Free to use / Open source - nope
Create a body that will approve a protocol for use if it's:
- Usable / accessible in 3rd party apps and platform agnostic
- Cost Is not artifically inflated
- Isn't artifically complex to prevent competition from implementing
Christ - can you imagine the stink the FOSS followers would cause if the EU set a benchmark that was bias towards MS or Apple?
Um, this sounds a little like the OSS argument as to why Vista is so bad.
A new major version of the application (or OS) has major security, architecture and GUI changes which has broken a minority of 3rd party extensions (applications) even though there was an extensive beta period.......
FF 3.1 (Windows 7) is a minor update based on FF 3.0 (Windows 6/Vista) and as such there are no major changes to the architecture rather some new features, bug fixes and other improvements....
Retail Price:
Windows Vista Home = $200
Canonical Ubuntu = $20
Included Support:
Vista = till 2014
Ubuntu = 2 months
Average cost for support:
Vista = $4.5 per month
Ubuntu = $10 per month
Wouldn't that make Vista cheaper?
(Flame-proof suit and troll hat most definately on! ;-)
... It's a damn sight better than XP.
It's just not worth spending large sums of money on. Don't bother upgrading hardware, and don't bother spending lots of cash on upgrading (if your a business).
However, if it comes OEM on a new PC, or if your a sensible IT Manager and upgrade your hardware every 3 years and get free upgrades from MS then it's a great platform. Took about a year for the majority of the 3rd parties to get drivers out, and also for hardware to play catch up - but now there is no good reason to avoid Vista.
Solid, stable, secure and fast platform on any hardware built since 2006. Go for it.
How on Earth can this possibly work? Encrypted HD (or a LiveCD) with a strong password running Vista or Linux will be enough to stop it. Terrorists aren't stupid - they know this law exists. I wouldn't be suprised if they issue out a memo from the Terroist IT Dept stating how to get around it. (using the methods listed above)
Something else to ruin the privacy of the innocent whilst the guilty get away...
I think you'll find that the majority was testing. Not fixing, not re-training and not re-coding. That's the difference.
NT4 to XP isn't exactly hard - and the compatibility between the two is superb. The fact that it takes them bloody years to test them all has little to do with the platform but rather the management of the project.
Adding another 2 years on top to re-write half the apps and then to train the admins is even more of a waste of cash.
OneCare runs on XP as well as Vista. Try reading the sys reqs.
Why the hell does it matter that CircuitCity is the first to sell Equipt? It's going to be flogged via Partners, retailers and MS directly - so what's the point of highlighting that CC is doing badly generaly?
Equipt is aimed for the SME market. As such the cost model is very attractive. A startup doesn't need to have any capital for the software that they know works.
Personally it's no for me, but I can see why some would see it as being attractive.
Maybe i'm getting old, maybe i've just been shortsighted - but isn't the point of a judge to UPHOLD the law?
Seriously - I mean what the fuck is going on when a judge in a court case ignores the laws he's doesn't fancy?
Stop the planet - I want to get the fuck off
"Vista, while more secure, has performance and reliability problems"
What "Vista" are you using? The one that's got various sources stating how it's more reliable than XP, or the one made from anti-microsoft hype...?
I'll give you the performance one - on the basis your probably using a 6 year old PC.
Regarding IE8 - a step in the right direction, but I'm sceptical till it's out in the full public domain.
The thing is guys, he's achieved something that nobody else has. It's well documented that he had a vision of a PC in everyones house... and through Microsoft it's happened.
Have a vision of something that's not been achieved... and then you do it. That's pretty much a visionary if you ask me.
Was he a superb coder? An excellent designer? Any good at man-management? Nah - not really.
BillG was/is a superb businessman. Given that Microsoft "didn't get" the internet in the mid-90's and that OSS Linux has been in development for over a decade and a half, Microsoft seem to be doing pretty well looking at their share price and desktop/server market penetration.
Even if Microsoft have lost their "leader" and all focus and are now heading for the pan, it's got to be at least a decade from now before there will be any major shift in the desktop arena due to the high density Windows / Office has.
BillG wasn't an innovator, but I think he can scape the title of visionary - and he sure as hell gets kudos for being a bloody good businessman.
His bank balance has come from somewhere....
Just thought I'd read the rest of the comments, and as much as I'd like to defend Vista from the hordes of Linux fans (not that there is anything wrong with Linux I'd like to add) - I can't see anything in the comments that actually point out a legitimate reason as to why Vista is so "bad"....
For such a technically aware audience you don't half put yourself down with meanless comments.
@ AV / Hardware not capable
Um, a sempron? WTF?! I'd point to that being the issue, but If it's more than 2.0Ghz and a gig of RAM i'd guess it work work fine to be honest. Had a AMD Athlon @ 1.8Ghz and 512MB that worked alright as a media centre box. Let me guess... it was OEM....? Do yourself a favor and format the bloody thing. Will run twice as fast. Failing that use MSCONFIG to remove all the nasty startup guff.
@ James
Um, I can't say I have even seen a post on the net about Vista's "DRM" since before it's launch. There are two types of DRM in Vista. One is the same as XP (product activation which is your product code and a one-way checksum. Ohhh - scary!). The other type is the same that's in any HDMI compatible device. Can't say I know anyone who has had problems with it as it's not exactly taken off yet. Although If you really want to stay away from DRM I guess you won't be "renting" any movies, downloading anything from iTunes and will be staying away Blu-Ray as well....?
@ Highlander
I agree with your sentiments - but the Kernel is not the problem. In fact from 2000 upwards the NT kernel has been very, very stable. BSOD is pretty much a thing of the past. Without stats to hand, I'd guess you'll see as many kernel panics on Linux as you would on WinNT. MS really need to get the GUI sorted and add in some more innovation - but the kernel would be the last thing think I'd want to change.
Everyone else - grow up. Vista was bloated 2 years ago when 512Mb RAM and dual core was top of the range. In todays market Vista will run fine of cheap hardware. It's stable, more secure than XP and requires less 3rd party guff to get going. The cost for Business compared to XP Pro is less per $/£ and there's an abundance of drivers for pretty much everything. Poor drivers, promising too much and high hardware spec's were all true at launch. But 2 years later it's a different story.
Anyone that has used Vista in an enterprise environment will be glad to hear XP slowly being outed. XP was a fantastic OS (well, from SP2 onwards) and Vista is just an upgrade on that. Did have high hardware spec's and louzy drivers but you can't buy a PC that won't run Vista OK on todays market and driver support is infinately better than XP.
That in mind - what is so bad about Vista? On a new PC with no OEM crap installed there is nothing worse in Vista than XP - but there's a lot better and a lot of new stuff too. (UAC, IE7+, DX10, BitLocker, Instant Search, ImageX, new GPO's, new GUI, better driver support, mobility centre, numberous security improvements, etc.)
Between the better driver support, much better security and new management features I stand by what I've always said about Vista.... It's not worth buying new hardware for, nor is it worth going out and paying money for the licences - but there is more than enough new stuff in it to make it worthwhile if getting it through Software Assurance (e.g. free) and/or you already have the hardware to run it.
You get it on OEM in the last year / in the future then it'll work fine and be better than XP - plus it hasn't cost you. You get it through Software Assurance then it's worth rolling out to your desktops/laptops that have a good enough spec. Cost you nothing financially and the management/support/security improvements easily outweigh the minor effort of deployment. (Which again is better than XP using RIS/WDS via ImageX)
Goodbye XP - we had some good times together; but I need more security and drivers, better management and I need a more user friendly UI. I'm leaving you for Vista. I'm sorry.
So long, and Farewell
I love Symbian. I quite like MS software, but nothing ever came close to the power of the Symbian OS. Nokia did it no favours in it's lifetime. SE with UIQ didn't do a bad job with the UI - but again it's wasn't perfect and had no "wow" factor. Under-the-hood it was amazing (think GPS, 5MP Camera +, installable apps, java support, latest connectivity, superb development environment, very 'hackable' etc.)
Then look at Apple. The iPhone has a truly great GUI. Now I hate Apple - but you can't fault the fact that it does have a pretty big "wow" factor. Just a shame that the guts are pretty wanky and the usual Apple marketing/fanboism come with what otherwise is a great UI.
I mean, just look at the N82..... pretty fast, 5mp camera with xeon flash, reasonable GPS, 8Gb removable storage, HSDPA, installable apps, web browsing, wifi, bluetooth etc. - all on a single platform. Amazing stuff - just a shame the packaging wasn't done better.
Um, RIS is free - it comes with Server 2008/2003/2000. Same as RRAS, AD, DNS etc. It's just a server function.
Not too sure what you mean about remote.... The end users at my place do it themselves. They press F11 at the boot screen, enter in their username and password and have a coffee. 40 minutes later they have a freshly formatted OS install with all their apps and documents again.
Why do you need to be involed? It's automated...?!
Said it in the title. Windows 2000 Server, RIS, DNS, AD - all in a polished GUI with full image deployments... without the "apt" "yum" and other stupid names that are unrelated to the task at hand.
This is news because the "OS to the Gods" can finally do something Windows has been able to do for a decade.....
WTF are you on about?
If you can point me to an OS where the user cannot run an application that encrypts their own files, then maybe your post has some merit.
An application that runs when a user tells it to, and all it does is encrypts files that the user has access rights on.... tell me exactly how on earth any OS is going to stop this?
This isn't a Windows exploit (like the majority of virus/malware infected users) - it's an application that is installed under the pretence of something else. Called a Trojan - look it up.
And there isn't a OS in the world that this wouldn't work on - unless humans are not allowed to touch it.
And regarding your Windows bashing - I want to double check with you... your Ubuntu (presumably as your technical knowledge seems to be lacking) box is plumbed into the internet without a firewall...? If that's the case, you really have little credibility posting here. Any OS - Windows, Mac, Linux SHOULD have a firewall in front of them. It's just common sense and best practice.
Whilst you don't seem to understand the concept of Trojan Horses, i'm going to explain it just to see..... If a user is logged onto a computer with administrator / root access then clicks on a "free screensaver" download - what has the OS done wrong? That's how malware is often installed. Users run as admins (as they prefer convience over security) and then download any old crap. Again - that is not a Windows exploit, but rather a social engineering trick with the payload written/compiled to run on a Win32 operating system.
Vista's UAC (similar to linux Sudu) wouldn't stop this if the user is an admin as they think they are installing screensavers. Again, on a Mac or Linux box the same applies - just get a user with root to try to install your malicious application - simply ensure the app is advertised as "britneynaked.exe" instead of "ransomware_virus.exe".
Very few infections are from worms or browser exploits. It's normally stupid users opening attachments / downloading apps whilst running as an administrator. This has nothing to do with the OS of choice - it's the end user that executed an application without knowing what it will do - resulting in actions that the user didn't want. The OS obeys the users commands and opens the app which encrypts files.
If you need correcting in more simple terms then I suggest a GCSE IT.... FFS
When the fuck did half you guys try running Vista?! Hardware and drives haven't been an issue for the past 12 months. Maybe late 2006 and the first quarter of 2007 the drivers were flakey as hell (TP ones were. The ones MS published themselves "out-of-the-box" were fine.) and were few and far between.
Since then and a clean, retail (or volume licence) install of Vista on any hardware purchased in the last 4 years and it'll run as well as any other OS. Gig of RAM and a low-end Dual Core will do fine. (High-end P4 will run it OK). Any box above 2 cores and 2Gb RAM will fly with Vista in comprision to XP.
Strangely, one of the reasons my co-workers prefer's rolling out Vista to XP is the fact that he doesn't have to spend all fucking day searching the net for a WinXP NIC driver - Vista just has them in the box.
In terms of why to upgrade, the biggest reasons are mainstream support from MS and security. UAC is a vast improvement over the previous WinNT security models that finally makes sense. A volume licence customer will not be paying for Vista - but just gets the latest client when it's released. As such if your hardware isn't archaic (e.g. the last 4 years or so) then you have nothing to lose other than better security, a more slick interface and integrated search. (Oh, and BitLocker, IE7+ sandboxed, better driver support out of the box, previous versions, DX10, new GPO's etc.)
Um, maybe it's cause I just woke up - but from what I read in the article he's not exactly slating it.
I'm with Ben Edwards on this one. Seen Vista on thousands of machines. From Quad Core 8Gb desktops through to my own home PC of a P4 3Ghz with 1.5Gb. Works fine on all of them. Only seems to run worse than XP on machines that were "budget" 5 years ago. (P4 2Ghz or less and uner a gig of RAM.)
Take a peek at www.neowin.net's home page for the member poll. As it's not a windows fanboi site but a IT news site it's a pretty good indication.
Oh - and BTW OSS / Mac fanboi's - on the same merit of such as "small" installation base for Vista - what does that say about Linux and OS X? (As Vista has a much, much bigger installation base than them)
(And how very brave of you)
As much as I respect someone who won't even put his name to a post, I'm going to listen to a couple of independant 3rd parties and the developers about power consumption:
http://www.greenercomputing.com/resources/resource/xp-vs-vista-consider-power-savings
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/xp-vs-vista,1531-11.html
http://download.microsoft.com/documents/uk/business/PC%20Pro%20Labs%20White%20Paper%20Mar%202007.pdf
Whilst most readers of El Reg will of course discount Microsoft's whitepaper - TomsHardware has a pretty good name for itself and their 100%, scienfic tests prove you otherwise.
0870, 0845 and 0800 are not real numbers (obviously) - they are just pointers to a real number which is normally tied to a ISDN30 circuit at customers premises.
The PBX or sometimes BT will use CLID to present the known number on outbound calls. The reason for this is that the caller return number will be correct as the real non-geographic number may not handle inbound calls.
An example is a call centre in Norwich may be setup just for outbound dialling on a automated dialler system. You call any of the numbers that are really on the attached ISDN30 circuits and you'll get nowhere. Instead we used CLID to present the 0800 numbered call centre in Manchester which deals with our inbound customers.
This way we didn't need to spend thousands on inbound call monitoring equipment and didn't have to spend ages training agents on inbound call handling as well.
There is a legitimate for CLID "spoofing" - but obviously this example isn't one of them. OFCOM should do something - but banning it outright just isn't really a posibility.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
