Uhm.... No. WRONG. Other way around - and that's NOT what got him started. Microsoft Basic, the implementations of which he HAND COMPILED in machine language was what gave him his real start, not DOS... ... and when it comes to MS-DOS (remember, MS/PC-DOS are not the ONLY 'DOS' of the era, nor the first), Bill tricked Tim Patterson into signing the rights to QDOS over on a dime (five figures) keeping the IBM deal he had on the table for a BASIC ROM (the original reason IBM contacted him) and Operating system under wraps (many say Bill basically sold QDOS to IBM before he owned the rights to it )... all of which occurred because Gary Kildall of Digital Research dropped the ball refusing to sign an NDA. Had Kildall responded faster/better/within normal business practice, the home computer revolution might have been CP/M based and Digital Research might be todays Microsoft. Would've, should've, could've....
Oh, come on. The specifications required for Windows Vista aren't that high. Even my relatively mid-range laptop can run it with ease.
Will these threads ever stop being created? Vista is an awesome operating system that will only improve over time just as XP did. Who cares about sales figures, how your crappy system can't run it, blah blah blah. Vista is the future....XP is the past...get over it
UAC is actually a system set in place to ward off un authorized execution of applications. Infact you can safely run Vista without an antivirus but the same cannot be said about xp. The UAC popups were annoying at first but I'm used to it. I'm not denying the fact that XP is a good system but just because it is good does not make Vista bad. Microsoft has not forced anyone to upgrade to vista at all.
I'm running Vista with....Firefox, Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne, Adobe Image Ready, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, Adobe Photoshop 7.0, Incredimail, Microsoft Word, TiVo Server, Power Iso, Windows Sidebar, and Kaspersky all at the same time. Yet my computer is ready for more? Get your facts straight and stop posting if you haven't even tested the OS out.
How much did you pay to have this privilege? Which is the point to this thread why spend good earn money on something XP already does.
My laptop (which is the computer used in the screenshot) was only like $900... Far from a waste of money or too much being spent. I haven't upgraded anything on it. Sure its a good computer, but why is that being held against vista? Programs will get beefier as time goes on and you will need a better computer regardless of whether you are running XP or not.
This is the biggest misconception there is. Programs don't have to get beefier. Companies can start cleaning their code. Not just commenting them out or writing another command to disable the first.
I do think it's unfair to create so many versions of VISTA. I would never have switched to vista for the basic version.
Part of the issue is the cost to buy/upgrade to vista is almost a third the cost of a new computer. Vista will slowly creep into the market place with people replacing their computers.
As a programmer myself I can say cleaning up the code has nothing to do with it. Big programs need big resources....end of story.