Building/Upgrading a PC for TS2
Rose Outlaw:
Quote from: katenigma on 2006 December 10, 19:37:12
Most people are going to want to upgrade eventually, so why not get the upgrade for free?
The voucher for a free update to Vista is a different story, I was aiming at the "get WinXP Prof instead of Home" point. :)
J. M. Pescado:
Quote from: katenigma on 2006 December 10, 19:37:12
Most companies are giving the Vista voucher for free. So if I were going to buy a new computer from some idiot company right now, I'd go ahead and take the voucher and trade it in for Vista next month.
It's not free, the cost is simply hidden from you.
Quote from: katenigma on 2006 December 10, 19:37:12
And then the CD would sit in a file drawer until SP1 is released. ;) Most people are going to want to upgrade eventually, so why not get the upgrade for free? Except that when I do make the change, kicking and screaming, I'm going to want the 64 version (it's going to be a thousand times more secure, since it prevents anyone from changing the kernel, even AV's who are throwing a fit about it, which it why it got removed from the regular versions) and I don 't think they're giving out vouchers for that, only the regular version.
I'm not sure that's necessarily a *GOOD* thing. I mean, sure, it sounds good in theory, but it will also obstruct attempts to hack around the Microsoft spyware. And we know Vista is spyware. BAAAAD.
dizzy:
Doesn't 64-bit break a ton of stuff? I heard that even Visual Basic is obsoleted on win64.
If you're going to use Windows in the future and you insist on connecting it to the internet, you may as well upgrade to Vista. It's much more secure than XP, anyway (unless you consider Microsoft a security risk, that is).
KatEnigma:
64-bit doesn't have the drivers yet, but eventually it will. It doesn't "break" anything, the companies just haven't had the time to write drivers yet and rethink how they do things since everyone wants to be able to access the kernel.
And "more secure" is Microsoft Lies and Propaganda. XP will be more secure than Vista for years to come because they started completely over with Vista. People have been poking sticks at XP for 6 years now, and it was based off code used in other versions of Windows (or stolen from BSD) which had also been poked and prodded and had tens of thousands of holes and problems fixed. As late as this fall, the build still had a major hole in it that other OS's had patched literally 20 years ago. XP has just gotten to a stage where it is relatively secure- as secure as something that's not open source can be, probably. It will be 6 years, at least, before Vista even approaches that.
witch:
I was told that Windows was originally not intended for networking, that when they added this they made everything open by default to aid the networking process. Then they spent the next few years closing everything as it became obvious there were security risks.
If Vista is designed from the ground up, would they start by closing everything first? That might make it more secure.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page