Vista Appraisal

Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
is better than XP?
Please try to keep emotion out of replies
Bob

That depends on the end users perspective
And eventually, assuming you wish to use a supported o/s, there will be no
win alternative

"Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
> is better than XP?
> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
> Bob

DL wrote:
> That depends on the end users perspective
> And eventually, assuming you wish to use a supported o/s, there will be no
> win alternative

"Eventually" is years off and by that time Windows 7 will be out.

Alias
>
> "Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
>> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
>> is better than XP?
>> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
>> Bob
>
>

Bob Hughes wrote:
> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
> is better than XP?
> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
> Bob

If XP does everything you need, there is no need to get Vista.

Alias

There are none

"Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
> is better than XP?
> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
> Bob

"Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
> is better than XP?
> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
> Bob


More features = less boring

--
Jon

"Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
> is better than XP?
> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
> Bob

You want me to keep my emotion out of my reply? You said KEEP EMOTIONS OUT
OF MY REPLY???? Why I oughta.....

"Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
> is better than XP?
> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
> Bob

Though I am not a Vista fan it does have a few features that you may find
useful.

Here is one if you do publishing

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/default.mspx


Also, with each reboot, a restore point is created
so any files that have been deleted or changed can be restored by simply
right-clicking on the folder
they were in and opting to restore previous version.

Additionally Vista has built-in non-destructive repartitioning
and a memory check diagnostic.

Due to Vista using considerably more resources than XP...
none of the above reasons are sufficient for me to use it...
but Vista does have at least a few possibly useful features.

Additionally, Vista has added security as compared to previous versions of
Windows...
though of course, some people consider it extreme nagging <G>

"philo" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> "Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
>> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think Vista
>> is better than XP?
>> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
>> Bob
>
> Though I am not a Vista fan it does have a few features that you may find
> useful.
>
> Here is one if you do publishing
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/default.mspx
>
>
> Also, with each reboot, a restore point is created
> so any files that have been deleted or changed can be restored by simply
> right-clicking on the folder
> they were in and opting to restore previous version.
>
> Additionally Vista has built-in non-destructive repartitioning
> and a memory check diagnostic.
>
> Due to Vista using considerably more resources than XP...
> none of the above reasons are sufficient for me to use it...
> but Vista does have at least a few possibly useful features.
>
> Additionally, Vista has added security as compared to previous versions of
> Windows...
> though of course, some people consider it extreme nagging <G>
>
>


But that is why Vista uses more resources. It has the ability to recover in
a way that XP can't and never will be able to do. That is a good thing,
isn't it?

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

> "philo" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>>
>> "Bob Hughes" <> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9A555A9AB79AEBobsomewherecom@207.46.248.16 ...
>>> Is it possible for someone to give objective reasons why they think
>>> Vista is better than XP?
>>> Please try to keep emotion out of replies
>>> Bob
>>
>> Though I am not a Vista fan it does have a few features that you may find
>> useful.
>>
>> Here is one if you do publishing
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/default.mspx
>>
>>
>> Also, with each reboot, a restore point is created
>> so any files that have been deleted or changed can be restored by simply
>> right-clicking on the folder
>> they were in and opting to restore previous version.
>>
>> Additionally Vista has built-in non-destructive repartitioning
>> and a memory check diagnostic.
>>
>> Due to Vista using considerably more resources than XP...
>> none of the above reasons are sufficient for me to use it...
>> but Vista does have at least a few possibly useful features.
>>
>> Additionally, Vista has added security as compared to previous versions
>> of Windows...
>> though of course, some people consider it extreme nagging <G>
>>
>>
>
>
> But that is why Vista uses more resources. It has the ability to recover
> in a way that XP can't and never will be able to do. That is a good thing,
> isn't it?
>
What if Microsoft was capable of producing an operating system that didn't
require restore points? Are they so unsure about the stability of their OS
that they need to include this bloatware "feature"? Seems that everytime
there's a problem with an update or an app install, the "solution" is to
rollback to an earlier restore point and the need to keep such a load of
them. Why not just produce a STABLE operating system to start with with the
ability to easily fix the thing if something goes wrong? That's how it's
done in the Linux world.

Cheers.

--
What does Bill Gates use?
http://tinyurl.com/2zxhdl

Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.

Q: What OS is built for lusers?
A: Which one requires running lusermgr.msc to create them?

Frank, hard at work on his Vista computer all day:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/war...tm/compost.htm