>>>Guess I should read through all the above posts to dig out the answer, but is there a good reason for changing to Vista? If indeed it reduces throughput (render rate etc) then that seems a very good reason to leave it alone until there are strong disadvantages in sticking with XP.<<

Serena,

Oh yeah, Vista will increase your render times by 98.9%. It will also cleanse you of your sins (and makes a great diuretic).

UUUMMMMM. --------------------------------------------------Maybe Google will come up with an alternative OS.
JJK

Here's an interview with the guy from McAfee, blasting Vista's bad security:

http://news.com.com/Why+Microsoft+is+wrong+on+Vista+security/2010-7349_3-6123924.html



ken

Wow, this is kind of similar to the buzz around "New Coke". Remember that one?

After a while, respected investigators will clearly outline what works, what doesn't, who should upgrade, who should not. Vista will get patched, then more testing.

I'll be installing a new proc/motherboard in a couple of weeks, with a spiffy new install of XP Pro. That should hold me for another 12-18 months to let the dust settle.

By then do you think MS will release a newly upgraded, freshly patched version of "Classic XP"?

Yeah-yeah...whatever.
Take your personal issue with me and blow. I've censored myself for your tender ears/eyes anyway. You seem more concerned with language over the point made.

Point is, if you don't like the topic and it's related replies then YOU are the one with the problem (it's a forum).
My reply stands...I could give a rats **** about your "request".
Enjoy that if you must (and "shut up" yourself).

And I see that there are lots of responses blasting the article, including one post saying that "PatchGuard" has been running on WinXP64 and Win2003 server for the last two years.

The arguments seem to be that, on the one hand, MS blocks that particular mode of access for viruses, and on the other hand virus checkers get blocked from checking and acting on those viruses because the virus checker is also blocked.

So, perhaps if McAfee is succesfully blocked then so are new and unknown viruses? Or, to put it another way, if a virus successfully circumvents patchguard then a Virus checker should be able to as well.

The article is 4 monthes old. Anything more up-to-date?

Rob Mack

pmasters, having used and tested Vista are you finding significant differences in render times vs xp, such as the + 25% or so toms was showing with mpeg2 ?

I think you're kind of coo-koo personally, what's the reasons for such defense of this idiotic OS? How is anyone's views on it affecting you or your life?
This thread isn't about "you and I" (there is no you and I in the first place) - so end it kid. Let others discuss the topic.

>>I promise you this much, half the crap you say I bet you wouldnt say it to my face.<<

Well, no. I can and will say the same to your face just as well.
It really isn't a problem. Not much more to add there.


>>>>Furthermore, I have no problem with your views thats its not for you. But several times I have seen you claim that Vista is this or that or is no good or has evil intentions yet followed up with very little merit or reasons. I could care less if anyone on the forum upgrades or doesnt. Neither of us will be doing anyone a service if we take a stance saying to buy or not to buy it. Nothing wrong with simply stating what features work for you or dont and then allow others to form opinions based on what they read instead of rants. <<<

You say you don't care if users buy it or not....then why the reply like this? If you love it and want to stick thru it - go right ahead. Meanwhile, those with scruples will realize what it is and reply/act accordingly. I'm sorry if we don't see this golden-calf of an OS in the same light you do. Deal with it (and quit targeting me in this thread from here on out - it's boring me and everyone else. It has no place in the scheme of things).

>>>BTW, its not censoring but I do have high school students that frequent the boards and dont care to read about rats gentials or giving people the finger for helping simplify your posts and links <<<

High-school students....and my personal censoring? My you ARE living a lie, aren't you? Your "high-school students" can probably teach us all some new colorful words. Nice try and get a life.

>>"I've tested Vista well enough to know this release is for people who know no better, average ma & pa, or COMPLETE IDIOTS."<<

Still stands.

we are done talking - move along.

>>>"Of course nothing created in Office 2007 will open in previous versions." <<<

Guess I should have said that this wasn't personal knowledge, just relaying information mentioned by computer dealers. Guess they had it all wrong.

Office isn't entirely compatible with Office 2000, with 2000, you've got to convert them outside of Word, etc., first. From the MS Office website:

By installing the Compatibility Pack along side of Microsoft Office XP, or Office 2003, you will be able open, edit, save, and create files using the Open XML Formats new to the 2007 Microsoft Office system. Office 2000 users, as well as users of Windows 2000 SP4 and later, can convert Open XML Formats to binary file formats from within Windows Explorer.

see: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/HA101686761033.aspx

Not much to do with Vegas but -- what the hey!

thanks for answering my question at the bottom of your rant.

Both of you are real tuff guys.

Bill wont be using it.

>>>Listen here sunshine, maybe you would but you would be eating through a straw for the remainder of your life.<<<

LOL! Pastmaster here is going to throw down - over an OS.
Ok kiddo, whatever you say (coo-koo, coo-koo).

Your "students"? You're an idiot and a liar.
Keep dreamin', and we're done talking.

Im not playing this game. Later Bubbles.

Interesting observation:

All day, the total number of replies to this thread was in the 90's. It says 87 right now, this should be #88. Maybe we have thread-specific cleanup now.

Too bad the SMS people have to monitor it that closely now. I would prefer them to simply delete the whole thread, then go back to coding the new Vegas 8 Titler!

:-)

fldave, if they did remove anything, it must have been serious, as your off-topic reply and now mine are still in existence here.

Here's a helpful chart of the Vista upgrade paths as provided by Microsoft.

It speaks for itself.

Bjorn, it's another fine example of "one picture is worth a thousand words."

Just read in PC Magazine that upgrading to Vista and DirectX10 also requires a new video card and new drivers to handle Direct X10 to get speeds back up.
JJK

We could only hope Dave.. LOL

Office 2007 works well.

Its user interface is completely different, so users will need to be retrained.

The Compatibility support (to interoperate with older versions) requires intelligence and skill for maximum success. It is not a no-brainer at all.

Don't install Office 2007 on some machines in your organization and expect no trouble with the rest.

Office 2007 has great Excel features for financial analysts and other hardcore number crunchers, and a few nice things for Word users, amongst other things. Overall, a good product.

But, you may want to avoid installing Outlook 2007 and keep Outlook 2003 or 2002.

In Outlook 2007, Microsoft's new Politburo for Office decided (over violent beta tester objections) to switch the HTML rendering engine from Internet Explorer to that used in Word.

Do I need to say more than that?

(For the non-techies: this means e-mail newsletters, etc. arrive garbled and a lot of content is simply unreadable because the HTML or CSS used is not supported by Word.)