Vyizerezomanymorehorzezazzezanzereizhorzez?

You know Vista is a turd when Steve Ballmer runs his presentations on an Apple.

http://blog.internetnews...rs-presentation-co.html

I think sombody's about to pull the car over... :)

And what was accomplished with all this arguing here? Ahh yes, as suspected, nothing! Everyone should do what everyone wants to do, you need no permissions from this forum or any other to use any OS you so choose. Getting nasty with each other will not help and I am sure the Linux Makers or Microsoft could care less.. enough said...

Service Pack 1 for Vista doesn't make it any faster, it only is a bug-fix for the most part, the only thing faster is copying files from a network basically.

I have no problems with stability with XP, never had, my office never has, and theres no way in hell were going to move to Vista. Even if Vista is put on the fastest system there is, if you put XP on it, it will be even faster! Not to mention the huge amount of memory it consumes just for the O/S. And what can Vista do that XP can't, and at what cost (hardware/memory increases), it simply is not worth it.

Service Pack 1 for Vista doesn't make it any faster, it only is a bug-fix for the most part, the only thing faster is copying files from a network basically.

*laughs*

New kernel. Performance tests done at ARS and various other sites disagree with you.

Even if Vista is put on the fastest system there is, if you put XP on it, it will be even faster!

*still laughing*

Try that little test on a Dual Core, 64 bit CPU with 4GB of RAM using the 64-bit version of Vista and get back to me on that. Until then, you don't know what you're talking about.

XP crawls on my system unless I remove a ton of services (TinyXP). Vista boots faster, applications load faster, and the UI reacts faster.

r! Not to mention the huge amount of memory it consumes just for the O/S

Heh... Wow. You know nothing about the OS, do you? The OS uses resources more efficiently. Meaning: it will utilize RAM/CPU for system tasks when not in use by user-initiated programs. It will release whatever RAM and CPU are required when a user-initiated program requests it. Neat, huh?

And what can Vista do that XP can't, and at what cost (hardware/memory increases), it simply is not worth it.

Your opinion, apparently based on misinformation. Not shared by many here. :)

very nice!

Why is this cretin PC_Tool even allowed to post on here. I respect the right of people, even him to post his opinions but why oh why does he have to get so personal.
He should change his handle to PC_Soft_Tool because he obviously has a problem getting it up! Nazi Germany didn't tolerate opinions which differed from theirs either. What a limp d***!!!!!!!!

It is surprising he is not banned since Beta News says: "Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated."

Him and __Hollywood are the worst trolls on this site. They should be banned.

SP1 did improve speed on several things, mainly coping files, but also the network speeds. With SP1 I can now stream recorded HD TV shows from one VMC to other other VMC with no issues (couldn't do that with just Vista). But yes - mostly bug-fix even though my bugs where do to Nvidia and Creative drivers (all fixed though about October 2007)

Pot calling the kettle ...ah, black.

Show me where i resort to childish personal attacks.

*laughs*

You call me PC_Troll all the time, jackass. Don't even *try* to play innocent. We're not that stupid.

Hollywood and I actually post facts and offer information, links, and support.

You, on the other hand, piss and moan constantly, never post anything other than trash-talk about MSF and fanboy BS about Apple.

That, and most of our personal attacks are return fire (We don't start it, but we'll finish it).

With you, it's different. I call you a moron and an idiot constantly because well, the truth simply needs to be heard. ;)

Nazi Germany didn't tolerate opinions which differed from theirs either.

Goodwin'd your own comment. Nice.

People's opinions are great, and I have every right to inform them when their opinions are based on flawed logic and misinformation.

If they don't want their opinions ridiculed, exposed as highly suspect and grievously flawed; If they don't want to be laughed at, made fun of, and taken for the drooling buffoons that they are, they need to get off the internet. :)

why does he have to get so personal.
What a limp d***!!!!!!!!

Nice touch with the hypocrisy. Really. It's cute.

Good of you to focus your efforts on me, though, as opposed to the 4 or 5 other users in this topic calling El Dingo a moron, idiot, mentally challenged, etc... Looks like I have another fan, folks.

"Hollywood and I actually post facts and offer information, links, and support."

Thanks. I just spit tea all over my laptop. that has to be the funniest thing i have ever seen posted on this site.

That is a fact. So you are saying you do not troll these forums?

And you just did another personal attack. Calling someone a "jackass".

When was the last time you helped anyone here? Gave advice (that wasn't "drop Vista and use Linux"), or posted links to sources backing up your lame-ass claims?

Right...never.

Now, go through this thread. Aside from laughing at you, I've made several posts providing information, and suggesting reasonable solutions to issue others may be having. Take a look in the Sp3 thread as well.

Know what's really funny? You're going to reply with a quote from me insulting you or some other jackass troll and think it proves your point.

>You think Linux doesn't have patches and upgrades?

Yes Linux does have patches and upgrades the difference is that the patches are small and the upgrades don't cost you anything.

>Vista is the best and most secure OS out there.
Correction... you think that Vista is the best OS out there.
>Yes, it true that it requires a powerful PC because they are moving with the technology.

This is a ridiculous statement and an excuse to cover up for the fact that you have to buy a more expensive pc to run it and you get no real performance benefit. My Linux pc is about five times faster than my friends Vista one even though my pc has worse spec than my friends.

Yes Linux does have patches and upgrades the difference is that the patches are small and the upgrades don't cost you anything.

The OP was whining about patches and upgrades, not cost. :) Nice of you to take that out of context. Are you Press or Politico?

Anyone that has a fairly recent computer should have an easy time running Vista, which in my opinion is superior in stability to XP. In addition, on my system which is an Emachines T6410 with 1.5 GB of RAM, my computer actually has a LOWER cpu usage than it did when I was running XP. I am running Vista Home Premium SP1 and so far it is running great and haven't really had any problems with any software except the software that was listed in the Vista Upgrade Advisor, which is a very good idea for anyone to run before deciding to install Windows Vista.

I tried the initial release of Vista, all it did was slow down my system, so I deleted it and went back to XP. Although, my understanding is that there is SP1 for Vista now, maybe I'll give i another shot if it makes the OS faster.

Vista is the best and most secure OS out there. Yes, it true that it requires a powerful PC because they are moving with the technology. As far as Mac and Linux...yuk they will never be in my menu

Not everyone came on the bandwagon of, I just have to have this new product no matter how good or bad it is.

Some folks must have the newest of everything. It is ok, they can do that just as there are those who would prefer to stay with WindowsXp as I did.

I see no incentive of buying Vista when windows 7 will come out in a year or two. Many who have VISTA will absolutly insist it is the best and those who do not will insist it is not. So with all this arguing, what is to be gained? To me having worked on Vista etc. it was a OS that was much hurried out the Microsoft door, all in the name of money. If it were not hurried out the door, then all those nice patches may not have been needed (notice I said may not). But one could say the same thing about WindowsXP and so the argument goes on.

All have a right to have on their computers what they wish. It is a individual decision that anyone may make.

I have to say however, I may well move on to Linux as I am quite tired of all the Microsoft nonsense of patches and upgrades. When you have a good OS that works properly with little problems, stick with it and improve on it. Do not make a entire new system that does not work any better then insist it does. What is the point...

I may well move on to Linux as I am quite tired of all the Microsoft nonsense of patches and upgrades

*laughs*

You think Linux doesn't have patches and upgrades?

Do not make a entire new system that does not work any better then insist it does.

Nice statement there. It works a hell of a lot better for me and many others. Perhaps it just didn't work any better for *you*.

hahahaha

You remind me everyone who refused to move to XP until they were forced to. Now, go and ask them if they'd go back to 9x on their P2 64MB.

Do you really think Windows "7" will come out anytime soon? Keep dreaming, buddy. If they do, THIS ONE WILL BE RUSHED OUT for marketing reasons. I mean, come on. Vista was released like 5-6 years after XP and you expect them to release a "better" OS that fast? Come back to Earth.

Nobody's forcing you to upgrade but don't force them to keep supporting XP forever. Don't worry, some people are still using 98, you're not alone.

Honestly, there is no reason to BUY Vista until you get a new computer. That being said, Vista runs great on any decent machine, even laptops.

I'm quite fed up with people spreading noobish statements around. Someone came to me and asked: "I'm running Vista on my laptop and I heard Vista is no good. Should I install XP?". I replied: "Who said that?" He said: "My neighbor. Oh well, my laptop is really fast, it works great. I was just worried..."

Vista is new and poor manufacturer drivers are to blame for most problems people have. Don't blame Microsoft for that.

I can see you've never used Linux before. Good luck.

Wow, you obviously dont know much about linux.

Yeah, Linux patches come out almost daily.

The good news is that there are very few that require you to log out or reboot.

That said, unless you set it and forget it; you'll be clicking the patch me icon almost daily.

(I'm ok with that, but not everyone is.)

I am one of those people who switched from XP to Linux when Vista came out. I didn't like what I saw and I have had plenty of time to troubleshoot "issues" on other people's Vista machines. Now I am happy and won't ever go back to Windows of any flavour.

Good to hear that Linux is your new friend over Vista!

Still have XP here and not planning on Vista . . . ever...

My OEM versions of Vista Home Premium run great on my HP computers. I've had a minor glitch here and there but not in a number of months.

Why? Because Vista is the same XP, BUT which needs an expensive-a*s PC. IT SUCKS. That's why.

Pulled that line straight from 1 year ago, didn't you?

*yawn*

it's okay, though, the "Vista=XP" thing still cracks me up.

I have to say, that headline is at best the result of a slow news cycle and at worst, either a comment troll or possibly even anti-MS bias. I honestly hope I'm wrong, I can't see any logical reason for BN to engage in either of those behaviors.

IMHO it always pays to use the least possible means, in every sense, and even more in hard economic times. I run a dual system XP-Win98se (Unofficial SP3). For simple tasks I keep using every day Win98 (it runs perfect, no viruses at all, fast and more stable than before). For more complex tasks I use XP. I never felt the need of a more sophisticated OS than XP, until now. I don't believe I'm the only one who thinks this way. Of course, I find perfect that anybody who has Vista enjoys it, and that anybody who likes Vista buys it. In spite of that, in my opinion there's no fair play when you are forced to pay to Microsoft (software provider) a single dollar whenever you buy a new machine (hardware parts), being hardware and software very different things, the first one created in America and the second one, in most cases, made in Asia. The EU considers this an abuse of dominant position, and almost every central and regional governement in Europe is already quietly moving towards tailored versions of Linux using Firefox or Ubuntu in their intranets for independence reasons and to alleviate their national budgets.

So when sales go down, that means piracy is up? Gotta love that one.

Didn't they lock down vista with activation much more effectively then xp? So they are suggesting that isn't the case? I mean, majority of people buy oem. That means, every computer they sell, at least 90 something percent of thetime has windows.

So if sales are down, pc sales are up from oem's? That means alternative os.

But who knows right. The thing about being at the top. Only place they can go is down....

Also often times people have the retail version, remember that version allows you to put it on your new pc instead of buying a new license.

They did release vista too soon. Sp1 should of been the starting point. But of course, it was already delayed by years and people were crying. So, they rushed it. Owell, someone made the call. And finally the big giant mammoth gets its feelings hurt. Still alive and well though. Hopefully next year is another 25 percent drop.

While I hate Vista due to the crappy performance I don't hate all MS OS's.

XP runs great and just about any software you can find runs great on XP - not so with VIsta.

I just tried Windows 2008 and was stunned even though it shares much of the same code as Vista SP1 - it runs SIGNIFICANTLY faster. If MS just release 2008 workstation people probably wouldn't be bashing it the way they do Vista.

Vista is a turd - Vista SP1 is a turd with icing and sprinkles on top. XP and 2008 are both good OSs. It is a shame Ballmer is to egotistical to consider listening to people - why they hate Vista and doing something about it.

Ballmer is Lucas and Vista is his Jar Jar or whatever that annoying creature is that he refuses to give up on even though critics and the public generally agree we'd all be best without it.

Your guys crying for ages that Windows not secure OS. Vista IS secure OS - all application working in "sandboxes". Thats obviously impacts performance and compability with old software.

Real problem for MS - they reach market limit. Almost no growth anywhere. If you're talking about emerging markets - guess what India, China will never buy software for $300+ with quite serious protection. Instead they will hack XP (God only knows how many hacked copies produced) use "kinda" free Linix etc

Soon market will s*** to mobile platforms and consoles. New users mostly stupid and lazy to learn. If you ask them to use MS-DOS command prompt they will die :))) This generation come from nintendo consoles and expect the same fun, fancy behaviour. So I think XBox360/PS3 has much more potential that any OS here

If MS just release 2008 workstation people probably wouldn't be bashing it the way they do Vista.

FWIW: Vista SP1 is the same kernel now as WS2K8.

The truth can be said without being a troll NOR an ignorant:

Because Vista is not for everyone, and not even a clear winner for most. You can try to push the market as Vista did being rude about hard reqs but as it is, NOT ENOUGH people choose it; be it hardware requirements, compatibility, price, a lack of new advantages or rather... THE SUM OF ANY KIND OF COMBINATION OF ALL THOSE.

Simple. Not enough find the balance to be in Vista's favor. AND word of mouth and press have been huge enemies this time.

Add anything you like to explain it.

"Meanwhile, after its own most recent quarter, Apple announced sales of 2.29 million Macs during the quarter, representing a 51% growth rate over the same period the previous year. "

That quote says it all. M$ is headed down while Apple is headed up.

lol, I love your not very intellectual comments
http://news.softpedia.co...-Mac-OS-X-in-2007-4.png
now matter how much you want to make it seem better...ah, I just love it

Wow, 2.29 million in a quarter. Almost as much sales as Dell does in a few days.

Yes, a company with 80% market share is gaining slower than a company with less than 10% market share.

*yawn*

companies with lower market share in a market find it easier to grow market share in a slowing economy than companies with a large percentage of the market share.

Can you figure out why that might be, or have you not taken your econ101 classes yet?

*ding*

Apple growing the Mac market share 10% over last year is still less overall market growth (in numbers, not percentages) than Dell sells in 2 weeks.

...but he still thinks that his cutting and pasting of that quote proves Vista sales aren't economy related.... Pure genius.

How about HP selling 12.99 million in the same quarter you seem to always ignore that part. You fail to understand some simple math it is much easier to gain a couple of percentage points when you are comparing shipments of a couple of million, to tens of millions and that is only figuring HP's 12 million. You also have to look at Gateway, Dell, and Sony sales are on top of that. You fail at comparisons.

MS is still having growth just not as high of a percentage. Again you fail at math. Granted Apple sales are growing but you always seem to bypass that the competition has a much larger install base so of course growth will be slower. WOW 6.6% market share I am sure MS is shaking in the shoes. What a blind twit you are.

I will not deny that mac sales are growing but they are not the only ones growing. Nice try troll.

http://www.alleyinsider...._growing_faster_than_hp

He really has a knack at being a spin doctor.

Basically Vista is a total failure. The sales reflect it.

On the other hand, Apple had an all time record Q1. Sorry your delusional M$ drone world does not let you admit Vista is a failure. Just like PlaysForSuckers, M$ XBox, M$ XBox 360, M$ Zune, M$ Spot, M$ Zune, M$ Live, etc...

M$ is lucky they have an illegal monopoly to fall back on.

The sales are higher than Macs and it's a total failure.

*yawn*

Only in the world of El Dingo...

I guess you missed Math class the day they talked about Percentages and what they mean.

This, coming from the guy who thinks Mac's meager market share growth vs. MSFT's enormous Vista share is a sign that it's not the economy affecting sales...

It's so pathetic it's almost cute.

I don't understand the issue. Vista is a much better OS then XP. Sure you do need a new computer to run it. But big deal. It's a vast improvement from XP. And SP1 just makes it better. I have not one issue at all and i play games and everything else under the sun. If you dont need to upgrade cause all you do is surf the net stick with XP or windows 98 or go Mac. Vista is not a must have anyway. It's not like a new car. It's a operating system. If you dont need it dont get it. If you are in need of a new pc then get it. End of story.

The first problem is the Vista 'Capable' one - people were basically 'tricked' into spending money on low end machines because they thought it would be perfect for Vista. Then Vista comes and they have lots of issues. This was bound to leave a sour taste for many, many people. Secondly, it's a fact that Macs 'just work'. If you're not a gamer and not interested in downloading and installing lots of different things then the Mac OS will appeal to me. I'm as much of a MS person as the rest, but Leopard has lured me a few times, based simply on the fact that it's 1 version and you get most everything you need with it.

Another issue as the commenter below has stated. I agree totally that the economy isn't doing so well right now. People aren't throwing money into software. People don't have alot of money to spend - so what's more attractive if you just want a computer to surf and listen to music on? An Imac with Leopard and 2gb of Ram or a computer with vista premium with ultimate (the perceived BEST version of Vista with everything in it) for +$200. It's psychology and 'truthful' marketing - word spreads FAST, and MS messed up royally at the getgo.

Oh yes a mac is a better alternative is this bad economy. A Mac Mini starts at 599.99 and that's a crap computer no matter how you swing it. A iMac starts at 1199.99, you might want more then the basic offering. And don't get me started on the cost of the glorious Mac Pro. If the economy is a issue at all Apple wouldn't be grabbing market share at all. I got my son a Dell for under 500 with Vista. Sure i wouldnt want such a machine cause i build mine. But he doesnt have one issue with the machine at all.

More likely the drop in sales for all sorts of items is due to the US losing 200,000 jobs since the first of the year. There just isn't a ton of money to spend these days...

bingo, all it is, US economy is down, we have a weakened dollar...and the govt feels sorry for us so we are getting our stimulus charity ;)

More than anything it could be as simple as negative word of mouth.

I think a lot of folks who are not as tech savvy might automatically expect an upgrade of their OS software to fully support the hardware and peripherals they already have. As a result of hearing that Vista may not, perhaps it's giving them pause and an understanding that the grass may not be greener on the other side of the hill and they are probably better off sticking with the XP system that they already have.

I also do believe that the many editions of Vista and the fact that the Home Basic version lacks the visual impact of the other versions can at the same time end up in confusion and disapointment.

Sometimes forking out cash for an upgrade that may end up causing more issues than benefits is just something many folks may not be willing to do.

Without a positive word of mouth and with companies having to reassure customers that they don't have to use Vista if they don't want to and they will still provide XP if they wish, it's a 1, 2 punch that may keep Vista on the canvas for a 10 count.

I have to agree that offering an array of different versions confused people. Also, MS needs to possible focus on just one OS and not continue to offer these multiple versions of their products and I include Office. I understand the premise behind MS offering the different versions but, to be fair, they did a piss poor job of explaining what hardware was needed to run each version and they did a piss poor job of not pushing their 3rd party apps to move quicker. Some 3rd party apps sat on the code given to them for more than a year.

I am now starting to see Vista as a transition OS to the next generation next year as opposed to a OS like XP. I still have faith that next year's OS will be the gold standard.

Of course if "bell bottoms" are still "hip and cool" (god forbid) then Apple will still do well. I have to admit that Apple has always struck me with it's restrictiveness, as appealing to the uneducated Masses (sort of like Clinton) and Ms and open source appeals to a more technical oriented and knowledgeable crowd, (sort of like Obama).

Have a nice evening.:)

Why are Vista sales tapering off?

because many people who have the misfortune to be running Vista (myself included) are telling everyone just how awful it really is.

word of mouth is a powerful selling.... or, in this case - non seller!

*laughs*

Try running it on something decent.

Seems to run fine here, and on the systems of many other people in this forum...

Same here. Then again according to pit$ingo I am paid to say that.

Agreed, Vista is a great OS. Especially after SP1, the only thing that it doesn't do better than XP is copying large files, it's a little slower. The only time I ever had problems with it was on my 8 year old computer, when I installed it the day I got it. Although it was kind of rough for the first few months after it released, most of the issues were due to nVidia drivers being so bad.

I don't think Vista is 'great', merely good... It is running fine on my high end systems but in fact I am disappointed - it should have been a lot slicker with all the resources, time and money spent.

Nevertheless it is still the best OS available for my requirements.

I hope Linux and Apple making inroads recently is creating a healthy competitive market to put pressure on everybody to innovate and deliver.

the only thing that it doesn't do better than XP is copying large files, it's a little slower.

Google TeraCopy.

Excellent freeware file-copy/move util. Replaces the Windows copier. Fast and informative.

Not so fast... I have strong suspicion that the mechanism TeraCopy employs is causing the Invalid File Handle issue on WHS. You have one, don't you..?

Yes, I do.

...can't say I've messed with it much lately unfortunately. It's sitting in a closet in the downstairs hallway. My files are still there, I can still access them, but I haven't really needed to do much with it since I found TeraCopy.

Not sure I want to now that you bring that up. :p

If you find out that your suspicion is true, please let me know. I'd hate to lose everything on my WHS. *shudders at the thought*

I managed to fix the issues with that script floating around and have since discontinued using Tera - and no more issues. It makes sense - as far as MSFT let out the issue is caused by programs doing incremental writes to files, which I suppose Tera does. Then again I'm not deep enough into the kernel to know what is different with regular copy.

I'll keep Tera installed and simply forgo using it when transferring files to the server.

*shrug*

I could live without it, I suppose, but why would I want to? ;)

You have to love the MS arrogance. Aligning any hardware sales that don't include a MS license with piracy. Even the term "unlicensed PC" is arrogant. Maybe GM or Ford should begin referring to all Toyota or Honda sales as "Auto Theft"

No - they can see how many PC are downloading MS updates based on area (not hard to do), and then it's just simple math. You have 100 Million PC's getting updates, but only sold 50 copies of XP and 25 copies of Vista.

Except the articles says *shipments* of unlicensed PCs. Nobody would be downloading these updates at shipment time, so this "simple math" isn't actually possible.

Yes, but even here at local PC shops (thinking of my friend's shop good size in Chicagoland), we sell PC with no license. Knowing that they will install an illegal copy of XP. But I guess if you want to get technical, if Windows is 90% of the market. Then PC shipments of unlicensed PC would assume that 90% are going to install an illegal copy.

Even Vista is not as restrictive as Apple Sp your Analogy works better with Apple. Just think of how Apple reacts to any perceived similarities between a Mac and another machine- They sue.

Also, It is interesting that Jobs gets caught with his hand in the cookie Jar (backdating of options) and MS is clean. Finally, the character of the two is worth noting because that character sets the tone of the company: Jobs has done squat with all his money except spend it on himself while Gates has been a leader, through his foundation, at putting his money to work trying to solve some of the problems in the world.

What other company but Apple and Jobs would apply for a patent that, if you really read it, basically says that any IM that is used on the IPhone belongs to Apple. If MS were to say this, the Government would be knocking at the door for another handout (fine).

Have a nice day:)
Look Apple and MS can co-exist in the same world. IT's a big place and there is room for Both. If you go with Apple then be aure to get the latest updates or you will find that Apple's OS is not as secure as everyone thinks.

Have a nice day:)

Maybe because Vista is slow, expensive, offers little new other than a security patch XP should have gotten, does not support most older hardware, etc...

Vista is a failure, plain and simple. You can come up with a million excuses about the economy, the weather, price of oil, etc...

Funny how Apple is selling record numbers of Macs, iPhones, OSX Leopard upgrades, etc... Heck iPod sales are still way in front of all the clone players.

And Nintendo is selling consoles and software like hotcakes, and even the PS3 is selling very strong in the #2 position weekly.

Guess that whole economy slowdown is shot to sh**, eh?

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
nice little stat for you

There is more copys of vista ("microsofts worst os") out there then the total number of macs. what that say about the mac? lol

as for the 360, it already has the core market and its sales are now back ahead of the PS3 in north america sales and its expected to be like that for the next two years.
However the wii is destroying both in terms of sales.

try again failure.

If you think Vista is just a pretty XP and better security, then you haven't used it much. Not counting the look (which I like but that is pref), there is so much more. Yes, 10% slower then XP, XP was 10% slower then 98SE, 98SE was 500% slower then DOS.

Actually, here in the real world, the monthly sales of the PS3 in the USA and the world for that matter have been ahead of the M$ 360 for many months.

Look for yourself.... http://www.vgchartz.com/

try again M$ drone, YOU FAIL

Overall, the world sales and the USA is still larger the the ps3 (you can check your #'s on your link provided)

If the xbox360 keeps selling decently and only losing a 10-20k each month the ps3 will never catch up.

Not everyone that disagrees with you is a MS fanboy, you really need to grow up the $ is cute when you are ten, as an adult you fail at life.

Funny how Apple is selling record numbers of Macs, iPhones, OSX Leopard upgrades,

Compared to three months ago? I *might* believe you on the Leopard bit, but the rest?

Good luck finding proof to back that BS up...

And Nintendo is selling consoles and software like hotcakes, and even the PS3 is selling very strong in the #2 position weekly.

Again...unless it's selling *more* now than it was three months ago, it proves nothing.

Again, good luck finding anything to back that BS up.

http://www.betanews.com/...own_spending/1209400550

Imagine...IT organizations spending less. Wonder if that might equate to less spending on hardware... Nah, El Dingo sez it ain't so.

*laughs*

I dunno...something tells me he's can't be considered an "adult" yet...although if he is older then 10...then you're right, he fails at life.

You in the real world what a joke. Maybe someday reality will come knocking on your door.

And the you fail how adult.

I guess Microsoft paid me to say that. Idiot.

Funny how you always seem to bring up your wii in just about every thread, must work for Nintendo. But then again that would be a violation of child labor laws.

Like i said NA sales of the 360 are ahead of the PS3 proven by the charts you listed
and with only 12 million sold and PS3 sales going down the xbox will be miles ahead over here.

over in Japan where they wont buy anything not made in Japan (lets call then fanboys like you) 360 will never have a chance.

And I see you have nothing to say about the total vista vs mac sales ;-)

must hurt being so wrong all the time kiddo

DUDE my machine smokes yours!!!! mine is a Q6600 clocked @ 3.82GHz with 8GB of memory and vista ultimate 64 bit so shut up... mines is bigger better faster and can run mac os X so suck my c***

Your right you buy a new pc and Vista comes on it that is expensive. With the right hardware it is not slow.

You really must live a pathetic life to revisit the same crap day in and day out. Amazing how you always manage to fit in the wii is selling like hot cakes. The only one that cares is you.

Troll on pit$ingo

Once again PC_Troll / Terminalx or whatever username he logs in with today demonstrates total cluelessness. From the above article....

"Meanwhile, after its own most recent quarter, Apple announced sales of 2.29 million Macs during the quarter, representing a 51% growth rate over the same period the previous year. "

From PC_Troll:

"Again...unless it's selling *more* now than it was three months ago, it proves nothing.

Again, good luck finding anything to back that BS up."

LOL. Apple posts an all time Q1 record and he says "good luck finding anything to back that BS up" ROFL!!!!!!!!!!! You really are not too bright, are you?

Sure the M$ 360 was rushed out a year ahead of the Wii and PS3. The Wii has crushed the M$ 360 and now the PS3 is gaining rapidly on it by outselling it every month worldwide.

LOL. The M$ 720 is coming soon. Just like they rushed the M$ 360 when the first XBox failed due to poor sales.

M$ has a monopoly on the desktop as proven in the USA and EU. See the Q1 results...LOL. Vista is a total failure even with a monopoly. LOL.

Must hurt seeing the M$ brick box 360 failing, M$ Zune failing, M$ Mobile failing, M$ Vista failing, M$ Yahoo takeover failing, M$ Spot failing, M$ HD-DUD failing, etc...

"And the you fail how adult. "

And the you fail how grammer.

On the Apple OS X Leopard thing, I didn't like the changes Apple made in Leopard. I didn't like the new GUI colors/shades, for example. I found it annoying that Boot Camp was no longer going to be supported / made available outside of Leopard, and even with 2 gig of memory, my 24" iMac felt slow.

For that and a few other reasons to do with the OS and lack of good utility level apps, I finally gave up on Apple and went back to using PC's exclusively.

I had an eMac and an iMac, but I don't think I'll ever be interested in owning anything Apple again.

Wow, you really are a dimwit aren't you? Are you so shallow as to believe that each OS that Microshaft puts out is suppose to be slower than the previous OS and this is perfectly exceptable?

What does that say about you and the other "smart" PC users who willing put up with this crap from Microshaft? So with your line of reasoning, Windoze 7 will also be slower than Vista and this is great "progress" and "innovation" from M$! ROFL!

Did you know that Mac OS X Puma was faster than Cheeta? Did you know that Jaguar was faster than Puma? I bet you also didn't know that Panther was faster than Jaguar? Or how about the fact that Tiger was faster than Panther? But here's what is really amazing, did you know that Leopard is even faster than Tiger?

HOLY SMOKES!

When each new OS version is slower than the previous generation, that is called REgression, not PROgression! Get a clue ToeKneeC and wake the hell up...

Serious question, are you mentally challenged?

It's like you just type "M$" and mash random keys.

You are such an idiot it is amazing. The first Xbox issue has already been covered. If you don't think that all the companies are already working on a new console you are an idiot. Then again we already know the answer to that. Do you sleep with your Wii? From the way you are in love with teh thing a person would wonder. It's time to get out of moms basement and find something to do. The only thing failing here is you douche$ingo.

ROFLMAO!

You fell for that? Holy crap, dude, I didn't think you were *that* dense...

*laughing*

Ya got me. A product with less than 10% market share got a little more market share.

What's amusing is you think that by comparing that to a product that has over 80% market share and saying it's selling *more*.

You crack me up, man.

*laughs*

That was actually pretty good. I'll give you that one.

Did you know that Mac OS X Puma was faster than Cheeta? Did you know that Jaguar was faster than Puma? I bet you also didn't know that Panther was faster than Jaguar? Or how about the fact that Tiger was faster than Panther? But here's what is really amazing, did you know that Leopard is even faster than Tiger?

On the same hardware?

Really?

Using what benchmarks?

How much faster does the latest version of iTunes run on Leopard than it does on Puma? Does it even run at all?

*laughs*

Now put Leopard on a Mac sold back when Puma was released. Now compare the speeds.

Here's the thing: On the hardware the OS was designed to run on, it will outperform it's predecessor...on that hardware. On the hardware the predecessor was designed for, the opposite will usually hold true.

Compareing today's OSes on todays systems with the OSes of yesterday , today's OSes will outperform. Put today's OSes on yesterdays hardware and you'll end up with a lemon. Apple, MSFT, Yggdrasil, or Ubuntu. Doesn't matter. Same results.

And you are the poster child for the English language.

I take that back you are a poster child.

grammar*

hint: that was part of the joke....

He was being clever for once. I'm amazed it didn't kill him. ;)

Again i point out how stupid your comment was and you pretend it was some witty joke. You really do not get it.

You really do not get it.

Pot, meet kettle.

Let me explain the joke that is you:

Apple announced sales of 2.29 million Macs during the quarter, representing a 51% growth rate over the same period the previous year.

51% of 6% is what again?

Microsoft's revenues of $4 billion for all Windows desktop OS software for the third quarter of the current fiscal year, in comparison to $5.3 billion for the same quarter the year before.

$4 of 5.4 is what again?

....it is you who doesn't get it.

change the subject when i have you backed in a corner troll? LOL. I own you PC_Troll.

Yes - I do, based on personally experience. Not that it is right. Then again, XP SP1 made XP slower, XP SP2 made XP SP1 slower and so on. Altough XP3 is showing improvements.

As for the Mac, I like Leopard. The OS reminds me of a stripped down version of Vista (but their default programs are very, very good). Leopard does however seem a tad slower then Tiger.

ROFLMAO!

The subject is the first quote, you moron, which was *your* second post in this thread.

Wow.

Pure comic gold, man. You can't even remember your own BS.

I don't mind my Vista laptop (granted, with extra memory installed and most of the gimmicks and effects turned off), but I greatly prefer my XP desktop, and intend to keep it as my primary PC for some time to come. MS would be wise to keep XP alive for a few more years at least, or risk losing customers.

LOL. Do we really need to ask this question? Sit in front of Vista long enough and the answer is self explanatory.

Besides cost, most people just simply prefer XP or something else rather than Vista. Simply as that. Alot of people might think Vista is good, more power to you, but I'll take Linux or XP over it.

It is mainly that people have grown stupid and don't like change. Vista has enough different that it takes most people time. They go to Best Buy, speed 5 minutes on it and say gosh...no. It's really sad.
On that same tone though, maybe the PC has become just a tool, an appliance. It's like you TV, you only move on, one the current one breaks.

You're quite a laugh, crow.(Crows are easily impressed by shiny things that have no real substance.... i.e. Vista.) You're just show how much of a fool you actually are.

As usual, sjc001 swoops in to insult anyone who doesn't share his delusions...

So...when *was* the last time you actually made a post here that contained anything more than personal attacks and insults?

Wow, I was thinking about asking you the same thing PC_Tool. Actually, referring to people as stupid because they don't like Vista qualifies as an insult, does it not? So sjc001 simply traded insult for insult with the moron he's addressing. As to all of his other comments, I haven't payed much attention to them.

I think you have it backwards, if you like Vista, perhaps it is you who has grown irreparably stupid. Contrary to the crap your saying about people spending 5 minutes with it and not liking it, I have setup two computers running that bloated, sluggish, Mac rip garbage.

My neighbor just purchased a new laptop running Vista Home Premium and what a nightmare. He already hates it and would gladly UPgrade to Windows XP. He runs a tax business from his home and isn't computer savvy. He just wants to get work done and could careless about all of the eye candy. His laptop came with 3GB or RAM and at times it still feels sluggish. CPU and RAM usage is quite high even when doing nothing more than visiting a webpage.

Vista is a lemon that more and more businesses and consumers are avoiding. But uber tech geeks and "smart" people like yourself are free to play with it all you want.

I didn't say stupid because they don't like Vista. Stupid as in their brains have gotten slow. Having XP out for 6 yeas compared to the standard 2 years, trained people not to learn new OS :) And yes, I like shinny things, I like my Acura fully loaded, I like my Zune, my daughters iPod Touch, and I love my big new HDTV. OH, and I love my two new Vista Media Centers that don't crash like my XP media centers :)

As to all of his other comments, I haven't payed much attention to them.

My entire post referred to those comments you've never paid attention to....

???

Your point?

IMO users have already found in XP long ago what they want and prefer stability and avoid being used as guinea pigs once more. Well, on the other side the present economic situation makes people be more careful with money.

U sir are correct! Thread closed.

Hmmmm .... Let's see. Gas is $4.00 a gallon, more than half the people who bought a new home in the last three of four years can't afford thier ever increasing adjustable rate mortgages, electricity rates have increased 50% over the last two years and natural gas is through the roof.

Maybe these things have something to do with a slowing economy, hence the trickle down effect which would explain why almost every company's earnings have slowed, not just Microsoft's and Vista.

I could be wrong ..... but that's not likely.

Hit the nail on the head. :)

Sales are dropping on damn near everything.

"Hmmmm .... Let's see. Gas is $4.00 a gallon, more than half the people who bought a new home in the last three of four years can't afford thier ever increasing adjustable rate mortgages, electricity rates have increased 50% over the last two years and natural gas is through the roof...."

Which may also be a factor in the following hypothetical conversation taking place in many homes across America:

"Gee Honey, we seem to be stretching our monthly budget to the max these days. How can we cut down on some expenses ?"

"Well, one thing's for sure, I'm going to delay upgrading to a new PC for now because the one we have (running XP) will serve our needs just fine for the next few months."

The gas has already hit $4.00 a gallon around here ($4.89 for diesel) and we passed about twelve homes with "for sale" signs yesterday driving along a suburban street. Somehow, I suspect these people have things on their mind other than upgrading to a Vista-capable computer.

except Apple who had all time record sales in Q1. And everyone spams this site saying Apples are the most expensive too.

*yawn*

You have now used this what, 4 times? How dense do you have to be to believe that using the growth of a companies market share when they only had less than 10% to begin with, has *anything* to do with the economy?

This is Economics 101, man.

If the computer economy is in the toilet as you are saying, the: "expensive", "trendy", "overpriced", "niche", items would be the first to feel it. Wouldn't they?

Why did 2.29 million Macs sell in Q1? A 51% increase over last year.

Of course customers spending (2.20 million * $1100 for the cheapest iMac) over $2.2 billion USD does not have anything to do with the economy. That pays the salary of a whole lot of Apple employees. That says a whole lot of people have money to spend on new hardware and new software.

Sure the total US Economy is trillions. By your logic in only looking at the whole, no industry has *anything* to do with the economy.

Oh well, you will never admit I have a point. I can't wait to read your troll post to this.

If the computer economy is in the toilet as you are saying, the: "expensive", "trendy", "overpriced", "niche", items would be the first to feel it. Wouldn't they?

All things being equal, yes. But you know they aren't. If they both had the same market share, the economy would effect them both equally.

They don't.

It doesn't.

Can't really make that any easier for the likes of you to understand, unfortunately. I don't speak dumba**.

like everyone expected...a troll post. I expected more from you. silly me.

That wasn't a troll, moron. That was fact followed by an insult directed at you personally.

Nothing trollish about it.

Perhaps the word does not mean what you think it means?

I dont know what peoples problem is with Vista. On suitable hardware its stable as feck and really really zips along.

Its faster to use, better looking and better security. Perhaps if people stopped using old hardware they'd see, i mean components are cheap enough to build a uber system.

btw i run vista x64 and it turds all over XP.