I do not hate Microsoft but some of the latest things I have seen tend to tick me off

[billdotson]

Let me say this I do not hate Microsoft. Some of the things they do are annoying and I disagree with those things but overall it isn't that bad.

I use XP SP2 and it is pretty stable as long as you do not try to customize it by doing anything other than changing your wallpaper or installing some of your favorite applications.
Being stable, being a good gaming platform, and having almost limitless compatibilities with software/hardware makes it a pretty good system. It mostly does what I want it to be able to do, and if I don't want to pay for a program to do something I find one of those money saving FOSS softwares. Hooray FOSS!

Although with the release of Vista and some of the things I have seen there are some things that MS has done/is doing that kind of ticks me off. Here are the complaints I have..

With Vista it is illegal to run Vista in a virtual machine program (this is if you own a legitimately paid-for copy) unless you buy the Vista Ultimate Edition (I am pretty certain about the Ultimate thing) That is pretty much saying if you buy this you should (and we will try to make you as legally as we can) use Vista only unless you pay $400 for Ultimate (which I hear many of it's 'Ultimate' features many people can't even use)

It's system requirements eat many people's computers alive. I have heard 2GB of RAM to run smoothly with the new Aero interface and 700MB just to be idling. Although as times go on hardware gets better but it seems that Vista is still too dependent on higher-end machines. Sure you can run it without the Aero but that is one of the biggest new features.

The stuff in the EULA about Windows Defender and how it (not an exact quote ) "scans for hardware, spyware and unwanted software and remoives them without the users knowledge" That wouldn't be as bad but without a clause to say what constitutes unwanted software that theoretically can give them too much power over what you can run on the OS YOU BOUGHT.

another one that doesn't really affect me as much but is still kindof annoying to others is the fact that Vista intentionally degrades the quality of high-def content unless you get a certain hi-def monitor or hi-def monitor converter. I even heard that someone using the media center features to record shows had the quality of his recorded shows degraded (now the TV recording would affect me.. :mad: ) although these type of restrictions are not MS but the MPAA told MS to do it so it isn't completely their fault.

Not entirely Vista related but the price of XP went up to the same as Vista to push adoption (and propelling hardware upgrade sales most likely) the corresponding types cost the same now. XP home and Vista Home premium are $200, XP Pro and Vista Business are $300. This is one of the things that really ticks me off probably more than the others..

you cannot choose the programs you want from the Office 2007 suite and pay for them individually (if you only use word, excel and access why should you have to pay for 5 other programs?) Although Office has never been like that.. but it would be a good system though.

Now to switch and say something nice about Vista:

the Aero interface looks pretty aesthetically speaking
built in media center stuff
advertised better security and backup utilities
better tablet PC support
for PC games the DX10 looks promising

what are your thoughts? I intend for this discussion to be just that.. a discussion about Vista but NOT a thread about bashing MS or their policies.

[SunnyRabbiera]

really the advantages in vista are stuff that linux and mac have had for years.
Aero is basically what OSX had for years now
the built in media center stuff is another "big whoop", both linux and OSX can match it with some tweaking.
The security and backup stuff is another moot point, Linux and OSX will always beat MS as long as MS is on top, already vista has got a few vulnerabilies in it.
The tablet PC suppot stuff is probably the only thing its got going for it, but give mac OSX and linux time and they will catch up.
And direct X, again give it time and it will have bugs up to wazoo.

[Gerard Barberi]

I've read that they will also not allow you to play DRM or any protected content on a virtualized Vista OS. Even if it is the Ultimate Edition.


With Vista it is illegal to run Vista in a virtual machine program (this is if you own a legitimately paid-for copy) unless you buy the Vista Ultimate Edition (I am pretty certain about the Ultimate thing) That is pretty much saying if you buy this you should (and we will try to make you as legally as we can) use Vista only unless you pay $400 for Ultimate (which I hear many of it's 'Ultimate' features many people can't even use)


But nothing is as bad as what they originally tried to do in Vista's EULA. Limiting the number of times you may transfer the license to another new PC. They originally limited it to a one time thing. XP lets you do it as many times as you want provided you remove it off the original PC.

This would have been bad to those of us who constantly upgrade our PCs with newer hardware. We'd be at the mercy of Microsoft to tell us when a PC has been upgraded to a point that it should be considered new.

[ssavelan]

My friend has xfce debian running well on a P-II. Video's, email, fast browsing.

To get further addicted to all those sweet games and porn, though, you're gonna want Vista.

[aysiu]

I've moved this to the Windows Discussions area.

[billdotson]

yeah the original transfer restrictions were quite ridiculous. what if you motherboard fried and you had to get a new one because that one was either out of warranty and discontinued or something? Or if your processor or RAM sticks died? That would've been an extremely bad mistake.. suicidal mistake.

I really do not know anything about Macs or OS X or OS 9 or any of that Apple stuff so I really know nothing of OS X's capabilities other than it is pretty stable, great out-of-the-box for multimedia, no viruses + spyware, and built on a UNIX or UNIX based kernel. Although while Linux OSes are kindof lacking in multimedia I have found the command line program vobcopy and the GUI app Avidemux extraordinarily useful for my needs (importing vob files from a DVD where I record my TV shows using my DVD recorder, cutting out the commercials and encoding them as mpeg, or xVid with Avi or Mpg4 containers.. teh xVid avi is awesome I got 'Back to the Future' recorded and shrunk down to about 700MB. A little more tweaking with the bitrate and I will have Back to the Future on a CD)

Personally though the only real thing with the media center that is good is the TV recording stuff. The clips of your images and that stuff is already done in Ubuntu and OS X. In Ubuntu if you mouse over a sound file for over a couple seconds it will start playing it! No more not knowing what that file is.

But with programs like MythTV for Linux OSes, and I am sure there are such programs for OS X that do those sorts of things, and even with XP (not the multimedia center edition) you can just buy a TV card and most of the time that TV tuner will come with recording software. And even if the software is not up to par with your standards you can get BeyondTV or a similar app for like $60 or so.

Microsoft to me (and probably to many others) is a mainly corporate for the business corporation and their OSes generally reflect this. They make a large majority of their capital from selling Office and Windows to businesses as license packages and other such deals.

[Coelocanth]

I'll just chime in for 2 cents on this:



another one that doesn't really affect me as much but is still kindof annoying to others is the fact that Vista intentionally degrades the quality of high-def content unless you get a certain hi-def monitor or hi-def monitor converter. I even heard that someone using the media center features to record shows had the quality of his recorded shows degraded (now the TV recording would affect me.. :mad: ) although these type of restrictions are not MS but the MPAA told MS to do it so it isn't completely their fault.

In my opinion, this is absolutely MS's fault. They caved to Hollywood by building this ridiculous DRM into their OS when they should have told them to take a flying leap.

[Trebuchet]

I'll just chime in for 2 cents on this:



In my opinion, this is absolutely MS's fault. They caved to Hollywood by building this ridiculous DRM into their OS when they should have told them to take a flying leap.I blame both equally. Microsoft should not have agreed to implement the DRM, but Hollywood and the RIAA should not have demanded it in the first place. I understand wanting to reduce piracy, but this is not the way and it's likely to generate serious backlash.

I don't pirate music or movies, but the first time I can't make a copy of a legally-purchased CD for strictly personal use in my van we're gonna have a problem.

[igknighted]

Let me say this I do not hate Microsoft. Some of the things they do are annoying and I disagree with those things but overall it isn't that bad.

I use XP SP2 and it is pretty stable as long as you do not try to customize it by doing anything other than changing your wallpaper or installing some of your favorite applications.
Being stable, being a good gaming platform, and having almost limitless compatibilities with software/hardware makes it a pretty good system. It mostly does what I want it to be able to do, and if I don't want to pay for a program to do something I find one of those money saving FOSS softwares. Hooray FOSS!

Although with the release of Vista and some of the things I have seen there are some things that MS has done/is doing that kind of ticks me off. Here are the complaints I have..

With Vista it is illegal to run Vista in a virtual machine program (this is if you own a legitimately paid-for copy) unless you buy the Vista Ultimate Edition (I am pretty certain about the Ultimate thing) That is pretty much saying if you buy this you should (and we will try to make you as legally as we can) use Vista only unless you pay $400 for Ultimate (which I hear many of it's 'Ultimate' features many people can't even use)

It's system requirements eat many people's computers alive. I have heard 2GB of RAM to run smoothly with the new Aero interface and 700MB just to be idling. Although as times go on hardware gets better but it seems that Vista is still too dependent on higher-end machines. Sure you can run it without the Aero but that is one of the biggest new features.

The stuff in the EULA about Windows Defender and how it (not an exact quote ) "scans for hardware, spyware and unwanted software and remoives them without the users knowledge" That wouldn't be as bad but without a clause to say what constitutes unwanted software that theoretically can give them too much power over what you can run on the OS YOU BOUGHT.

another one that doesn't really affect me as much but is still kindof annoying to others is the fact that Vista intentionally degrades the quality of high-def content unless you get a certain hi-def monitor or hi-def monitor converter. I even heard that someone using the media center features to record shows had the quality of his recorded shows degraded (now the TV recording would affect me.. :mad: ) although these type of restrictions are not MS but the MPAA told MS to do it so it isn't completely their fault.

Not entirely Vista related but the price of XP went up to the same as Vista to push adoption (and propelling hardware upgrade sales most likely) the corresponding types cost the same now. XP home and Vista Home premium are $200, XP Pro and Vista Business are $300. This is one of the things that really ticks me off probably more than the others..

you cannot choose the programs you want from the Office 2007 suite and pay for them individually (if you only use word, excel and access why should you have to pay for 5 other programs?) Although Office has never been like that.. but it would be a good system though.

Now to switch and say something nice about Vista:

the Aero interface looks pretty aesthetically speaking
built in media center stuff
advertised better security and backup utilities
better tablet PC support
for PC games the DX10 looks promising

what are your thoughts? I intend for this discussion to be just that.. a discussion about Vista but NOT a thread about bashing MS or their policies.

Please get your facts right. Only the very cheapest versions of Vista are illegal to use in Virtualization (that is Home Basic... which sucks anyway - no aero, no media center, etc.). Also, $400? Where did you hear that? Check this out: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16832116213. UNDER $200. Home premium, which is like XP Pro and Media Center combined is cheaper than both of those at $119 as well (and can be virtualized). As for the high def stuff, I couldn't care less. I let my TV do the TV stuff (yeah, a 20" POS from wallmart... hey, I'm a college kid... priorities - my comp lol.), and my computer does computer stuff. I did hear that Vista was only going to be truely high def in 64bit mode (in an attempt to force 64bit adaptation), but that was quickly backed off and the 32bit version is apparently quite capable (someone else will have to verify). I did some beta/RC testing of Vista and found that it ran completely stable, played games and ran Aero with 512MB ram, and didn't once skip a beat when I went to 1GB. I was well over 4 on the Vista Experience Scale. 2GB Min? Nonsense. Of course 2GB would be nice, but it is in no way needed, as I got great performance in CS:S and also video playback and aero with far less. I don't plan on using it (and I could have it free via MSDNAA), but I tip my hat to MS, because aside from DRM and that license nonsense (read: not GPL or associated license), this is their first release that interests me at all.

[majoridiot]

sorry... but if i spend my hard-earned money on software, i will run it however and wherever i want.
software companies claiming the right to tell you how you are allowed to use your software is like
a car company telling you where you are allowed to drive your car. once you buy the software,
there are plenty of legal protections in place without draconian EULAs and their laughable
restrictions.

i DO hate microsoft... but only because i got sick and tired of being accused of thievery! the
breaking point was replacing a dvd drive and a keyboard and then having to re-register XP because
my system configuration had significantly changed! there's a fine line between protecting
intellectual property and holding your consumer base hostage... and they blew past that one
years ago.

the next day i downloaded ubuntu and now use XP only on the rare occasion i need to access my
cable modem firmware. as soon as mozilla can read the image properly, i'll format and never look
back.

windows vista will be long-remembered as the impetus for a mass-migration to linux and mac.

[rsambuca]

Sorry billdotson, but I can't take you seriously here. Many of your facts are so clearly incorrect here. Perhaps you should do a little more research prior to posting these kind of inflammatory rants.

[hobieone]

to be honest outside of looking pretty ther really is no reason to upgrade to vista.
as for dirext x 10 yeah it looks promising but alot of developers are hesitant and may not develope for it . due to what i read the codding it uses will prevent them from port game to other platforms easly like ps3 , nentento wii or to the mac and ms has yet to aprrove any driversfrom ati or nvidia dx 10 card that will pass vista's content protection system on acount nvidia nd ati are refusing to give up thier unified drivers. so dx 10 i don't think will amount to much plus with benchmarks i've seen so far win xp is alot faster with games. not only that there is an article in information weekly a tech industry magazine about how the federal gov, agency like the dot has banned the use of vista and office 2007 due to it is not compatible with existing specialty programs and the cost is too great to develope new one. and the ffa stated thier research indicted vista cannot be trusted to run airport and aircraft system. plus the govt are currently testing alternatives such as the mac os and various linux, open office applictiopn to upgradr too. which means vista is costing ms millions of dollars in lost govt revenues.
i alsorecently had a issue with a vista machine less than a month old with a nast spyware infection on xp i can fix in an hour or less with vists 6 plus i wont go into the details. but it ended with me calling ms and getting accused of being a pirate and acted i had no authority to reinstall the os to get rid of a spyware that defender would not detect and vista would not allow the installation of the tooolss to remove the spyware and somehow the os decided it was registered once but wasn't going to again. anyway the system is fix ms did reactivate the os all in all was a pain in the ***. and i wont work on another vista machine.

in my opinion win xp is very stable fast and relaible solid os. works well with my dual booot for when i want to mess with linux and there is absolutly no need or reason to upgrade to vista atleast until ms stops telling you what you can and can't run on your computer and add the feature that vista was originally suppose to have.

[billdotson]

ok so apparently my facts were wrong.

The last time I looked Vista Ultimate was the only version I saw that was able to be run legally in a virtual machine and it cost $400 for the full package. I guess I didn't check out the OEM version ( I didn't really pay any attention to the upgrade version)

From what I have heard I thought Vista required much more hardware than 512MB or 1GB RAM.. I guess I am mistaken and I apologize, although it has been said that the ideal amount of RAM for a 64 bit system (which there aren't that many of these days) is 2GB.

Although my complaints about some things stay the same. The Windows Defender and the scan for "unwanted software" clause is something I do not want in an OS. Also, I do know that XP generally costs the same amount of $ as Vista does now so there is no economical reason to choose XP. XP is old and it's price shouldn't be raised to persuade you to upgrade to Vista.

Not that it affects me but the HDCP monitor thing is an issue for some people.. although I myself will not be buying into this whole Blu-ray or HD-DVD thing until one of them becomes the standard.. regular DVDs are working fine for me now..

on the system requirements for Vista processor wise for all versions of it are 1GHz. I thought processing power was more important than that.. :confused:

also, could someone clue me in as to what Vista was "originally" going to have?

[igknighted]

ok so apparently my facts were wrong.

The last time I looked Vista Ultimate was the only version I saw that was able to be run legally in a virtual machine and it cost $400 for the full package. I guess I didn't check out the OEM version ( I didn't really pay any attention to the upgrade version)

From what I have heard I thought Vista required much more hardware than 512MB or 1GB RAM.. I guess I am mistaken and I apologize, although it has been said that the ideal amount of RAM for a 64 bit system (which there aren't that many of these days) is 2GB.

Although my complaints about some things stay the same. The Windows Defender and the scan for "unwanted software" clause is something I do not want in an OS. Also, I do know that XP generally costs the same amount of $ as Vista does now so there is no economical reason to choose XP. XP is old and it's price shouldn't be raised to persuade you to upgrade to Vista.

Not that it affects me but the HDCP monitor thing is an issue for some people.. although I myself will not be buying into this whole Blu-ray or HD-DVD thing until one of them becomes the standard.. regular DVDs are working fine for me now..

on the system requirements for Vista processor wise for all versions of it are 1GHz. I thought processing power was more important than that.. :confused:

also, could someone clue me in as to what Vista was "originally" going to have?

For 64bit, more RAM is recommended. When you make processor demands twice as complex the RAM needs to keep up, so 64bit RAM instructions seem to require more RAM. This is true in linux as well, so a 64bit system should always have more ram due to being 64bit.

As for the processor, well, it isn't really that important for most tasks. Most people rarely max out their processor, and the speed gains between them are minimal. My new chip only runs stock at 1.9 GHz, which seems low, but it blows away my last two chips that ran at 3.0ghz and 2.4 ghz. Clock speed is no longer everything. Many new laptops come with only 1.4 or 1.6 ghz chips. I think if I tried to run vista on the old 1ghz athlon it would struggle.

[Ptero-4]

Aero "beautiful", give me a break. That thing is nasty ugly, I don`t know why everyone likes it so much, I just won`t take it.

[TheKid965]

The last time I looked Vista Ultimate was the only version I saw that was able to be run legally in a virtual machine and it cost $400 for the full package. I guess I didn't check out the OEM version ( I didn't really pay any attention to the upgrade version)

The way I understood the situation when it was explained to me, Ultimate and Business allowed for virtualization in their EULAs; Home and Home Premium did not. It's possible, from a functionality standpoint, to install any Vista version on a virtual machine, but only the Ultimate and Business versions allow you to do so without technically breaking the law.

And OEM versions have their own restrictions, such as not being able to transfer the license to another computer. At least, not easily and not without at least one phonecall to Microsoft asking for their kind permission to use the software you paid for and have a legal right to use. (This is based on my own experience, of course; YMMV.)

[Rhapsody]

I use XP SP2 and it is pretty stable as long as you do not try to customize it by doing anything other than changing your wallpaper or installing some of your favorite applications.

Back when I was using XP SP2, I got BSoDs about 1 in 4 times when Windows started. I had absolutely no idea why, but then I changed my wallpaper from a PNG image to a JPEG image, and the BSoDs stopped.

Why the file format of my wallpaper made any difference to Windows is something we'll probably never know.

[Trebuchet]

I'm still waiting for my first BSoD in XP Pro SP2. But then, I've only been using XP for a bit over two months so maybe I just haven't waited long enough.

[billdotson]

I personally have never gotten a BSOD on any of my Windows PCs.. ever. And that is after probably ~12-13 years of use. I have yet to see a BSOD on any of my dad's or my sister's PCs either. But at the local HS.. I seemed to be going down to the computer lab to tell the tech guy about one every other day.

[vinboy]

the advantage of Windows is the ease of use.
You want pretty aero glass? alright, just click this, DONE.

In Ubuntu Edgy, you have to apt-get .........
then configure the xorg.conf
then setup beryl and other bunch.
then try to run the new X xorg.conf, etc etc...
then read the forum, find solutions etc.

a normal computer users do not want these hassles.
in other words, the windows has a bunch of things integrated, nicely done.


Last time, I partitioned my HD using Kubuntu dapper stable release's installer, all partition table gone. It was a really sad experience.
I know we shouldn't expect too much from free software, but then why deleted all my partitions? :lolflag:

[Trebuchet]

I personally have never gotten a BSOD on any of my Windows PCs.. ever. And that is after probably ~12-13 years of use. I have yet to see a BSOD on any of my dad's or my sister's PCs either. But at the local HS.. I seemed to be going down to the computer lab to tell the tech guy about one every other day.I got BSoD's with dreary regularity in Windows 98SE. So far XP has been totally crashless. I'm not sure how much of my affection for XP isn't simply euphoria from not having my system crashing 3 or 4 times a week. ;)

My guess is that in most schools the computer lab systems are poorly maintained, not to mention kids constantly screwing with them. I'm not sure anything less stable than a block of granite would really survive installation in a classroom.

[billdotson]

yeah but I have never seen a BSOD on any of the PCs that have ever been in my house.. being about ~13 years worth of them.

[Trebuchet]

yeah but I have never seen a BSOD on any of the PCs that have ever been in my house.. being about ~13 years worth of them.I suspect putting them in a classroom would ruin that perfect record pretty quickly. And Linux can crash or lock up; I've had it do both.

[Lord Illidan]

I personally have never gotten a BSOD on any of my Windows PCs.. ever. And that is after probably ~12-13 years of use. I have yet to see a BSOD on any of my dad's or my sister's PCs either. But at the local HS.. I seemed to be going down to the computer lab to tell the tech guy about one every other day.

I've had a few myself...and major system lockups too.

the advantage of Windows is the ease of use.
You want pretty aero glass? alright, just click this, DONE.

In Ubuntu Edgy, you have to apt-get .........
then configure the xorg.conf
then setup beryl and other bunch.
then try to run the new X xorg.conf, etc etc...
then read the forum, find solutions etc.

a normal computer users do not want these hassles.
in other words, the windows has a bunch of things integrated, nicely done.


Last time, I partitioned my HD using Kubuntu dapper stable release's installer, all partition table gone. It was a really sad experience.
I know we shouldn't expect too much from free software, but then why deleted all my partitions? :lolflag:

Beryl/Compiz are still in alpha versions...Also, new distros are planning to have a 1 button install thing for them...so at a click of a button you get 3D desktop :)

[Lord Illidan]

I suspect putting them in a classroom would ruin that perfect record pretty quickly. And Linux can crash or lock up; I've had it do both.

Aye, yepp..I've seen XP bluescreen twice in a computer lab...memory access error or something while a student was programming Turbo Pascal.

I've had Linux crash a bit too..but usually user error. On the whole it is pretty more stable...

I once had 40 windows open in Compiz....(basically was opening images off a usb connected camera and using the expose` plugin to show them off...each image was huge and i have only 512 mb RAM).

It still operated...even though Compiz was alpha at that time (last summer) and while it got pretty slow and then got unresponsive, a quick CTRL-ALT-BACKSPACE enabled me to log on without restarting...

[ajmannen]

None of the now and "good" programs that microsoft have made to protect their presius
vista have passed any of the worlds official not corrupted antivirus tests,
+ i have vista, it always takes minimum 400 MB ram, and 1200 MB ram when running word 2007....................wtf.

[Imsati]

>But nothing is as bad as what they originally tried to do in Vista's EULA. Limiting the number of times you may transfer the license to another new PC. They originally limited it to a one time thing. XP lets you do it as many times as you want provided you remove it off the original PC.

And even as such with XP, the orignal CD Key is only good for a certain of installs. Afterwards, you need to click on the button to generate a new CD Key, then call MS everytime you upgrade hardware or re-install. I swear I've had to re-install so many times, my phone number is red-lighted and should I ever meet Bill, I'm certain we'll be on a first-name basis out of the gates (heh...and no, that was not thought of beforehand).

[blackangst]

Normally I think regular linux users are smarter than windows users, but...

ALL of this post is FUD. I'll explain-

Dont like Windows Defender? Do what I did and turn it off. Problem soved.

All in all, the OS doesnt use ANY more memory than XP, although it shows more memory in use. Reason? Superfetch. It is a core funtion of the OS that statically "learns" your computer habits, and pre-loads often used programs into memory. It is what XP -tried- to do with cacheing, but failed. In order to take advantage of Superfetch, you should have 2 gigs. If physical memory usage hits 80% (which is rare) Superfetch will scale down. Dont like it? Turn it off.

DRM. Where to begin. Vista does not "intentionally" downgrade video. DRM is more a licensing requirement that Microsoft chose to go along with, than it is some evil conspiracy. No, you dont need a hi def monitor to run video. Any monitor will do. You understand that to run hi def movies on your TV requires a hi def TV...right? Same with your PC. But...the way DRM works, is if you play a ripped video (your own or otherwise), all of the licensing crap has been stripped. When WMP 11 or any other player reads it, it doesnt see protected content, so DRM never comes into play. Once you learn about it's implementation in Vista you will understand if anything DRM has ENCOURAGED piracy. It in NO WAY affects playback if you use anything other than WMP, and even then, rarely.

Anyway, just thought I would address the concerns you expressed. What ticks me off is when people say Vista is just XP with a new GUI. Thats like saying the only difference between linux distros is the GUI. Very naive.

[igknighted]

the advantage of Windows is the ease of use.
You want pretty aero glass? alright, just click this, DONE.

In Ubuntu Edgy, you have to apt-get .........
then configure the xorg.conf
then setup beryl and other bunch.
then try to run the new X xorg.conf, etc etc...
then read the forum, find solutions etc.

a normal computer users do not want these hassles.
in other words, the windows has a bunch of things integrated, nicely done.


Last time, I partitioned my HD using Kubuntu dapper stable release's installer, all partition table gone. It was a really sad experience.
I know we shouldn't expect too much from free software, but then why deleted all my partitions? :lolflag:

In Ubuntu, I agree. But in Sabayon, PCLOS, Mandriva, Mepis... the list goes on... Beryl/Compiz are as easy to run as Aero. Every new KDE version has compositing functions that are nearly Aero's equal. We users often forget about them as Beryl/Compiz get the attention, but KDE (and perhaps Gnome, I don't really follow gnome) are implementing lots of neat shadows and transparencies... not the over the top cube and wobbly windows (which i love, but many users just want transparencies and shadows and that stuff).

[gigermunit]

really the advantages in vista are stuff that linux and mac have had for years.
Aero is basically what OSX had for years now
the built in media center stuff is another "big whoop", both linux and OSX can match it with some tweaking.
The security and backup stuff is another moot point, Linux and OSX will always beat MS as long as MS is on top, already vista has got a few vulnerabilies in it.
The tablet PC suppot stuff is probably the only thing its got going for it, but give mac OSX and linux time and they will catch up.
And direct X, again give it time and it will have bugs up to wazoo.

i agree