Is your PC Vista Ready?



  • I want Vista but I'm not sure if i want to run any applications. Maybe Dell might have a pc just for me:

    Dell's Idea Of A Vista Ready Machine

     

    Live at http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/solutions/en/winvista?c=us&cs=&l=en&s=dhs



  • great for booting and not using any applications or games aeh?... sounds bout right ;)



  • Haha.

    Still, one step above most Dells that I've seen.

     

    Great for...

    Breaking soon and often, forcing you to speak to some barely understandable guy with a thick indian accent called "Mike", before giving up and just buying a new computer. 



  • dell is currently running that special, $680 shipped for a computer and a 24" LCD screen for students...

    hmmm.

     

    -



  • wow, that's proably the most honest bit of marketing i've seen from dell and that "modern" 800Mhz processor sounds pretty fancy too



  • @chadillac said:

    great for booting and not using any applications or games aeh?... sounds bout right ;)

    You try to run notepad -- it bombs. 



  • They aren't selling that computer.  That is just a chart of the minimum/recommended/dell recommended hardware stuff.



  • @tster said:

    They aren't selling that computer.  That is just a chart of the minimum/recommended/dell recommended hardware stuff.

    Please excuse my poor grammar... what i meant to say was:

    "dell is selling a $680 computer that includes a 24" monitor, pricing is for students"

    24 inch monitor for $680, sell the computer... nice.



  • The REAL(TM) WTF is that Vista's so power-hungry. I mean, my main computer is 1GHz proc/512Mb RAM, and it runs applications perfectly fine... (OS is linux)



  • @ProfessorMoriarty said:

    The REAL(TM) WTF is that Vista's so power-hungry. I mean, my main computer is 1GHz proc/512Mb RAM, and it runs applications perfectly fine... (OS is linux)

    Vista is memory-hungry, but if you turn off most of the stuff, a Vista install runs pretty fast even in VMWare with 256 megs of RAM.
    I see no slowdown compared to XP on my 1.46Ghz/512Mb RAM laptop.
     



  • I agree with zlogic.  Everyone says XP is slow, but they are just running in super silly mode with all the bubbles and fades and stuff. 



  • On the other hand I run Linux with all the bells and whistles on and still it is faster than XP.



  • What bells+whistles are those?



  • @dhromed said:

    What bells+whistles are those?

     LILO



  • @dhromed said:

    What bells+whistles are those?

     

    I use Beryl/Compiz on my Linux box.



  • @H3SO5 said:

    @dhromed said:

    What bells+whistles are those?

     

    I use Beryl/Compiz on my Linux box.

     That is pretty cool.. in fact, I think Beryl + ubutnu would be enough to get me to go back to linux



  • I've been using Vista for about a month now and I always get a kick out of popups with the caption "Is your computer Vista ready?  Download our free spyware to find out!" popups.  No - my computer won't run Vista, which is why I've been running it for a month.  Alrighty then...



  • Beryl+XGL : ubuntu

     

    Beryl, ubuntu, XGL for the win. now if only steam, EALink, and wow would run!

    WTF is compiz? i keep hearing about it. someday i'll look it up.



  • Beryl is a branch of compiz.

    Ok, who can point me to a dummies guide on setting up a useable ubuntu box with Beryl and whatever else I would need / want to look flashy. I'm sure I could troll the various communities, but this seems like a decent place to start.



  • @webzter said:

    Beryl is a branch of compiz.

    Ok, who can point me to a dummies guide on setting up a useable ubuntu box with Beryl and whatever else I would need / want to look flashy. I'm sure I could troll the various communities, but this seems like a decent place to start.

     

    I find 

    http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Edgy

    very good
     



  • @GeneWitch said:

    Beryl+XGL : ubuntu

     

    Beryl, ubuntu, XGL for the win. now if only steam, EALink, and wow would run!

    WTF is compiz? i keep hearing about it. someday i'll look it up.

    That's soo cool! I didn't know Linux was so far into 3d stuff. 



  • Cool, but ultimately useless. If I wanted 4 desktops where I could only make use of one at a time, I'd setup a 4 monitor system and put them on a rotating plinth.

    The new 3D stuff in Windows and Linux look good, but for the most part, they're solutions looking for problems. 



  • @RayS said:

    Cool, but ultimately useless. If I wanted 4 desktops where I could only make use of one at a time, I'd setup a 4 monitor system and put them on a rotating plinth.

    FTR, most Linux desktop environments have supported multiple desktops for ages.  The only new thing with the cube is that it's a cute way to visualise it.

     

    The new 3D stuff in Windows and Linux look good, but for the most part, they're solutions looking for problems. 

    That's pretty much true, but the underlying technology is pretty new and it's natural for people to want to show it off in the flashiest way possible.  There are already some useful features, such as zooming (OK, the concept isn't new, but it's a nice way to implement it), an Exposé clone, transparency (some people hate this, but it has its uses, especially if the screen isn't big enough to put windows side by side) and a "negative" mode (some people find white-on-black easier on the eyes than black-on-white).  I'm sure more will come in time.



  • Yes, virtual desktops are great, I use them anywhere that I can't have 4 physical displays (i.e. laptops), and sometimes even then still use them anyway. The idea of OS-level accelerated zooming is interesting, as is the whole concept of using these awesomely powerful GPUs to do what they were designed for instead of doing it all on the general purpose CPU...

    To me, 3D computer desktops just won't be truly useful until we have a 3D display & input, thinking along the lines of interactive holograhpic display, or 3D goggles (they do nothing) with glove thingys.

    Until then, I just see lame video after lame video of windows disappearing into a whirlpooling sphere sitting on the surface of a rotating cube, while moving other windows to an angle that stops you doing anything useful with them.



  • @RayS said:

    Yes, virtual desktops are great, I use them anywhere that I can't have 4 physical displays (i.e. laptops), and sometimes even then still use them anyway. The idea of OS-level accelerated zooming is interesting, as is the whole concept of using these awesomely powerful GPUs to do what they were designed for instead of doing it all on the general purpose CPU...

    To me, 3D computer desktops just won't be truly useful until we have a 3D display & input, thinking along the lines of interactive holograhpic display, or 3D goggles (they do nothing) with glove thingys.

    Until then, I just see lame video after lame video of windows disappearing into a whirlpooling sphere sitting on the surface of a rotating cube, while moving other windows to an angle that stops you doing anything useful with them.

    I can think of some practical uses for hardware zooming. For example, you want to know how your website looks like on 1600x1200, but your display is only 1280x1024. Solution: Increase the size of the window, but zoom out concurrently.



  • @ProfessorMoriarty said:

    The REAL(TM) WTF is that Vista's so power-hungry. I mean, my main computer is 1GHz proc/512Mb RAM, and it runs applications perfectly fine... (OS is linux)
    No kidding.  Their requirements for their "Server" OSes are even more ridiculous -- multiple gigs, for the operating system.  What does it do with it all?  Smells like planned obsolesece to me;  "these old PIII's aren't becoming useless fast enough!  Quick, release a bloated hog that won't run on them!"



  • @ammoQ said:

    I can think of some practical uses for hardware zooming. For example, you want to know how your website looks like on 1600x1200, but your display is only 1280x1024. Solution: Increase the size of the window, but zoom out concurrently.

     Using hardware zoom is in fact stolen from exposé. It's great beryl can do the same stuff, even with an hotcorner : bring your mouse to a specified corner and you can see all opened windows. On mac os x you can zoom out for all windows, or only windows from current application.

    The only bad thing on mac is the poor XWindow integration. I did several ubuntu edgy installations recently, and I fact I miss it. Strangely enough I feel more comfortable on ubuntu than on a mac, except for a few applications.
     



  • @Corona688 said:

    @ProfessorMoriarty said:
    The REAL(TM) WTF is that Vista's so power-hungry. I mean, my main computer is 1GHz proc/512Mb RAM, and it runs applications perfectly fine... (OS is linux)
    No kidding.  Their requirements for their "Server" OSes are even more ridiculous -- multiple gigs, for the operating system.  What does it do with it all?  Smells like planned obsolesece to me;  "these old PIII's aren't becoming useless fast enough!  Quick, release a bloated hog that won't run on them!"
    No. The RECOMMENDATION is for that.  I run Windows Server 2003 on a Celeron 333MHz with 512MB RAM, and only a 20GB disk.  It also runs Exchange Server, Internet Security and Acceleration Server, and some random daemons.  The only impact the low spec has is that it's faster to Remote Desktop to it than to log into the physical console.



  • @RayS said:

    Cool, but ultimately useless. If I wanted 4 desktops where I could only make use of one at a time, I'd setup a 4 monitor system and put them on a rotating plinth.

    The new 3D stuff in Windows and Linux look good, but for the most part, they're solutions looking for problems. 

    Yeah 4 virtual desktops is stupid. I use 6.

    That way I can put logical groups of windows together on each desktop and switch between tasks with CTL+ALT+<arrow>. I tend to keep a lot of things open when I work, regardless of OS, and rather than a single window or program representing a task, I have multiple windows and apps representing a single task. No other desktop metaphor is as neat or efficient for handling that. Logical groups of windows appear on an uncluttered desktop with an uncluttered bar.

    I tried all that Beryl stuff, but switched it off. It seemed like a bit of extra power consumption for not much more than distraction. I don't even think the're solutions looking for problems, just eye candy looking for suckers. Clean lines are highly underrated.

     



  • @Some Idiot said:

    Yeah 4 virtual desktops is stupid. I use 6.

    That way I can put logical groups of windows together on each desktop and switch between tasks with CTL+ALT+<arrow>. I tend to keep a lot of things open when I work, regardless of OS, and rather than a single window or program representing a task, I have multiple windows and apps representing a single task. No other desktop metaphor is as neat or efficient for handling that. Logical groups of windows appear on an uncluttered desktop with an uncluttered bar.

    Exactly what I do too, albeit with a different key combination.

    That combined with tabbed browsing helps prevent me having 100+ unordered, unmanageable windows open, and as you say, helps delineate tasks.



  • @GeneWitch said:

    Beryl+XGL : ubuntu

     

    Beryl, ubuntu, XGL for the win. now if only steam, EALink, and wow would run!

    WTF is compiz? i keep hearing about it. someday i'll look it up.



    Yeah, I use Beryl as well :)
    I've got some screenshots of mine (screenshots are a bit old, I've changed some stuff since then):









    And a screenshot of XWinWrap combined with the GLMatrix screensaver :D



Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.