[SGVLUG] Upgrading on a slow connection

[Charles Wyble]

matti wrote:
> Hi,
>
>   
>> From: Charles Wyble <charles at thewybles.com>
>>     
> [..]
>   
>>> Yup! No way you will get Vista to work on an
>>> older system.... Vista even had trouble with
>>> systems rated as "Vista Capable" but
>>>       
>> didn't
>>     
>>> have enough RAM or a good enough video card.
>>>   
>>>       
>> Once again. This isn't true.
>>     
>
> I disagree with you on this charles,
> I would sugggest that people 
> should look at the class action 
> law suit over this issue...
>
> http://www.tomsguide.com/us/lawsuit-vista-capable,news-621.html
>   

Yeah I'm well aware of that. There was a bunch of leaked memos etc. I 
believe it generated a big thread
on this LUG list if not then one of the many others I am on. :)

It's a gray area.

What I am referring to is the bit about an older system not working. 
What is an older system?  Is a virtual
machine on a decent CPU (Say MacBookPro or AMD64 dual core) with 256 
megs of ram and a relatively
standard Nvidia video card?

Old system is a very vague concept. :)
> If it wasn't an issue you would not have
> seen this Law Suit imho.
>
>   
>>> Vista is a pig, and even my windows friends
>>> prefer XP at home and at work.
>>>   
>>>       
>> Vista isn't a pig. I have found it much more stable
>> especially under heavy
>> network traffic loads then XP was.
>>     
>
> EVEN at MS conferences I attended MANY of the attendees 
> preferred XP over Vista for a number of reasons 
> ( in particular the MS launch event I mentioned
> awhile back where they were giving away MS software.)
>   

I was at that launch event.

I'm relating my experience with a product, and you are ignoring it and
saying what other people have said. :)

I am not sure why other people have had issues with Vista. In the 
configuration
I used, I found it performed as well as and in some areas better then XP 
did. Did
I do a formal benchmark? No I didn't.
> >From what i could tell from one session where the
> presenter asked about XP vs Vista Preferences there
> were at LEAST 5x more people who preferred XP vs Vista.
>   

Fair enough. A lot of people prefer XP over Vista. There could be any number
of reasons for that.
> there are numerous reports you can dig up. This is
> just an sample of one...
> http://news.cnet.com/Windows-XP-outshines-Vista-in-benchmarking-test/2100-1016_3-6220201.html
>   

Benchmarketing :)

Benchmarks are very poor. Every article that comes out with XP 
outperforming Linux gets massive amounts of press and lots of comments
about "test your workload" etc. However when XP beats Vista I don't see 
the same comments. Sounds like a serious case of bias to me.
> I have also noticed a LOT of people who want to
> downgrade their new systems which CAME with Vista
> to XP... that should tell you something...
>   

Yeah. I have seen the stories on /. about that. How many people did that 
because of perception and there friends telling them to downgrade?
How many of them tried it out and found specific hardware/software 
incompatibilities (which I agree exist) or performance problems and
then down graded?

Again all I ask is that people don't just rehash what they have 
read/heard. I ask that they objectively evaluate before jumping to a 
conclusion. See
Iraq War 2 for what happens when you don't do that. ;) (Sorry couldn't 
resist it's election day and all)

I have a great deal of respect for Miguel because he has actually ran 
Vista and had performance problems. I don't disagree that he did as I 
wouldn't
try to take away from what someone says about a personal first hand 
experience. I did suggest he try a newer release and see if similar 
issues are encountered.

Have you run Vista at all?