Who here...

Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance? I
personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.


--
KingOfChaos

me too


"KingOfChaos" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance? I
> personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
> it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.
>
>
> --
> KingOfChaos

The date and time was 3/6/2008 1:49 PM, and on a whim, KingOfChaos
pounded out on the keyboard:

> Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance? I
> personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
> it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.
>
>

But if you take away what Vista "looks like", what do you have?
Basically XP! ;-)

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

Not hardly, The Shell is just that. One thing that gets overlooked is that
a large portion of Vista is a different code base from Windows XP. So
you can't peal off the Aero theme and say it's XP. Underneath the GUI
is more Server OS than Windows XP.

"Terry R." <> wrote in message
news:...
> The date and time was 3/6/2008 1:49 PM, and on a whim, KingOfChaos pounded
> out on the keyboard:
>
>> Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance? I
>> personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
>> it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.
>>
>>
>
> But if you take away what Vista "looks like", what do you have? Basically
> XP! ;-)
>
> --
> Terry R.
>
> ***Reply Note***
> Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
> Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

The date and time was 3/6/2008 3:08 PM, and on a whim, R. McCarty
pounded out on the keyboard:

> Not hardly, The Shell is just that. One thing that gets overlooked is that
> a large portion of Vista is a different code base from Windows XP. So
> you can't peal off the Aero theme and say it's XP. Underneath the GUI
> is more Server OS than Windows XP.
>
> "Terry R." <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> The date and time was 3/6/2008 1:49 PM, and on a whim, KingOfChaos pounded
>> out on the keyboard:
>>
>>> Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance? I
>>> personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
>>> it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.
>>>
>>>
>> But if you take away what Vista "looks like", what do you have? Basically
>> XP! ;-)
>>
>
>

Yes, but I know that most Vista users aren't concerned about the code
base. To most, it's how it looks. And to most others, it came installed
on their computer.

If it was worth the money for that "code base", businesses would be
flocking to it. I don't even see any grazing at this point...

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

Actually business does not want to spend the money and also wants to
make sure all the bugs have been worked out and all their mission critical
(including the bosses games) are compatible and that everything will play
together nicely out of the box.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit



"Terry R." <> wrote in message
news:uA4kIM#...
> The date and time was 3/6/2008 3:08 PM, and on a whim, R. McCarty pounded
> out on the keyboard:
>
>> Not hardly, The Shell is just that. One thing that gets overlooked is
>> that
>> a large portion of Vista is a different code base from Windows XP. So
>> you can't peal off the Aero theme and say it's XP. Underneath the GUI
>> is more Server OS than Windows XP.
>>
>> "Terry R." <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> The date and time was 3/6/2008 1:49 PM, and on a whim, KingOfChaos
>>> pounded out on the keyboard:
>>>
>>>> Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance?
>>>> I
>>>> personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
>>>> it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But if you take away what Vista "looks like", what do you have?
>>> Basically XP! ;-)
>>>
>>
>>
>
> Yes, but I know that most Vista users aren't concerned about the code
> base. To most, it's how it looks. And to most others, it came installed
> on their computer.
>
> If it was worth the money for that "code base", businesses would be
> flocking to it. I don't even see any grazing at this point...
>
> --
> Terry R.
>
> ***Reply Note***
> Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
> Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

The date and time was 3/6/2008 4:02 PM, and on a whim, Joseph Meehan
pounded out on the keyboard:

> Actually business does not want to spend the money and also wants to
> make sure all the bugs have been worked out and all their mission critical
> (including the bosses games) are compatible and that everything will play
> together nicely out of the box.
>

I believe my statement meant business won't spend the money on it.
Regarding "all the bugs have been worked out" and "all their mission
critical...are compatible and that everything will play together nicely
out of the box". That's not going to happen. How many businesses have
old hardware? Do you think they're going to run out and replace it for
an OS that offers nothing in productivity?

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

Well, it's disinformation. Vista has been very successful overall capturing
the market at a rate of a bit 1% a months. It is a wishful thinking by Vista
haters. It is true that the uptake by the business community especially
overseas could have been faster if not for a delay in new release of MAP
(Microsoft Assessment and Planning) for IT. It is my understanding that MAP
will be available simultaneously with SP1 in March. The previous version was
not compatible wish Vista. It was an XP oriented system.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../bb977556.aspx
Wishful thinking by the losers this is what all this rumination all about.

"Terry R." <> wrote in message
news:%23U34cl%...
> The date and time was 3/6/2008 4:02 PM, and on a whim, Joseph Meehan
> pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> Actually business does not want to spend the money and also wants to
>> make sure all the bugs have been worked out and all their mission
>> critical (including the bosses games) are compatible and that everything
>> will play together nicely out of the box.
>>
>
> I believe my statement meant business won't spend the money on it.
> Regarding "all the bugs have been worked out" and "all their mission
> critical...are compatible and that everything will play together nicely
> out of the box". That's not going to happen. How many businesses have
> old hardware? Do you think they're going to run out and replace it for an
> OS that offers nothing in productivity?
>
> --
> Terry R.
>
> ***Reply Note***
> Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
> Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

I do that even in XP.
The eye candy is not necessary.
I just want my machine to work.
If I want pretty, I'll go to an art gallery or the beach.

--
A Professional Amateur...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!

Change Alpha to Numeric to reply
"KingOfChaos" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance? I
> personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
> it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.
>
>
> --
> KingOfChaos

Personally, I really like the eye candy. But, I'm also a gamer. I love the
high performance, but I love it to look great, too. That's why I have a high
powered PC, so it looks good and does it well.

If I had a lower spec PC, I wouldn't mind turning down some of the eye candy
for more performance. But, as it stands, I wouldn't gain any performance by
turning down the settings. I did when XP first came out, but as soon as I
upgraded, I turned the visuals up!

--

Dustin Harper

http://www.vistarip.com | Vista Resource & Information Page


"KingOfChaos" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Sets their computer for best performance rather than best appearance? I
> personally couldn't care what the GUI for Windows looks like, so I have
> it set to best performance so all my programs run faster.
>
>
> --
> KingOfChaos