Originally posted by: velis
Current rumors are that Vista will be 64bit only.
Originally posted by: velis
Current rumors are that Vista will be 64bit only.
Originally posted by: sigs3gv
Vista will be probably both 64bit and 32bit. I will be "upgrading" from Windows XP to Linux when Vista comes out
Originally posted by: velis
Current rumors are that Vista will be 64bit only.
Originally posted by: rodneykm
Originally posted by: sigs3gv
Vista will be probably both 64bit and 32bit. I will be "upgrading" from Windows XP to Linux when Vista comes out
Sounds like a downgrade to me. I prefer my stuff to be able to run all the games and programs I like. Linux is overrated. No offense intended.
Originally posted by: Link19
I hope Vista gets delayed. Honestly who needs it? I am already happy with Windows XP SP2. Window XP SP2 is already a good OS for today's generation of hardware and software for the next couple of years at least. So why do we want or need Vista as early as 2006? All it will offer ast first is more bloat.
Your just full of misinformation this week, aren't you. Do you think your going to be forced to upgrade or something? If your happy with XP SP2, good for you, stay on it.
Originally posted by: Link19
Your just full of misinformation this week, aren't you. Do you think your going to be forced to upgrade or something? If your happy with XP SP2, good for you, stay on it.
Microsoft will probably force you to upgrade to it if you want to use the latest hardware and software. That just isn't right.
Originally posted by: bsobel
Originally posted by: Link19
Your just full of misinformation this week, aren't you. Do you think your going to be forced to upgrade or something? If your happy with XP SP2, good for you, stay on it.
Microsoft will probably force you to upgrade to it if you want to use the latest hardware and software. That just isn't right.
Have an example of where they have done this? Or just more FUD? And how is it not 'right'. Your system works today, with the applications you have today. How are you entitiled to run 'new' things forever on your current OS? This doesnt work in any other industry (did you get upset that the new model of your car has side air-bags and you can't install them on your model?, or the new version of your cellphone is MP3 compatible and your old one is not?)
Bill
I never said forever. How about for three years you can run everything you want on Windows XP before you will have to upgrade.
The way MS is, it is likely they will try and force everyone to upgrade only a couple of months after Vista is released. Even though that clearly didn't happen after Windows XP was first released, it is only because Microsoft wuldn't have been able to get away with it without significant customer backlash. I fear it weill be easier for them to try and force people to upgrade so quickly this time.
Originally posted by: bsobel
I never said forever. How about for three years you can run everything you want on Windows XP before you will have to upgrade.
The way MS is, it is likely they will try and force everyone to upgrade only a couple of months after Vista is released. Even though that clearly didn't happen after Windows XP was first released, it is only because Microsoft wuldn't have been able to get away with it without significant customer backlash. I fear it weill be easier for them to try and force people to upgrade so quickly this time.
It's hard to have a discussion when your simply going to post lies. You have zero evidence of this (none, nadan, zip). By your argument, why wasn't this done with W2K?
The reason your not taken seriously is you constantly lie, try to stick to facts (same for The Linuxator)
Originally posted by: Link19
Originally posted by: bsobel
I never said forever. How about for three years you can run everything you want on Windows XP before you will have to upgrade.
The way MS is, it is likely they will try and force everyone to upgrade only a couple of months after Vista is released. Even though that clearly didn't happen after Windows XP was first released, it is only because Microsoft wuldn't have been able to get away with it without significant customer backlash. I fear it weill be easier for them to try and force people to upgrade so quickly this time.
It's hard to have a discussion when your simply going to post lies. You have zero evidence of this (none, nadan, zip). By your argument, why wasn't this done with W2K?
The reason your not taken seriously is you constantly lie, try to stick to facts (same for The Linuxator)
They are not exactly lies. You are only saying they are because you are biased towards error reporting and label anyone who doens't use it as selfish.
People don't want to use Error Reporting for their own reasons. It is not your place to tell people that they are stupid for not wanting to use Error reporting!!