Wouldn't the same argument go for Vista 64bit with SP1? This brings its codebase inline with Windows 2008 which has been pretty stable so far. I have also noticed that many new computer peripherals do have drivers for Vista 64 bit. I did not have any driver issues with my new computer and peripherals like printers, video card, external drives etc. Obviously, time will ensure more drivers are brought out including support for older peripherals. I did notice that Creative have a few Vista 64 bit drivers listed now.
Server 2k8 is usually on a narrower hardware base, and they did a good job NOT filling it up with the rubbish Vista is loaded down with. The SP1 'improvements' aren't that great for the simple fact the OS is still bloated down with rubbish 2k8 doesn't have. At which point if I WERE to suggest a 'vista level' OS - Server 2k8 looks more and more attractive. Just install it without IIS on it like people used to do with Win2k and some people do with 2k3. Used to be a lot of users were running Win2k Server with the server componants stripped out, because it actually delivered better performance than 2K Pro or XP. (mind you, we're talking the same type of optimization nuts that probably now all run Gentoo) New newer newest IS what you need to even THINK about vista... The problem is there's a lot of legacy hardware there AREN'T newer versions of because the old ones were more than the average user actually needed - see the entire Creative Audigy/Audigy2/X line. They 'claim' to have working drivers - having tried them and being one of the people who actually uses his A2ZS platinum to it's full capacity - Uhm, no. "Not ready for prime time" With XP you could at least tell it was going to come into it's own... I'm just not so sure it can be done with Vista without a rewrite that would make XP SP2 look like a one line registry tweak.
Yeah, but not everybody can use Server 2k8 especially gamers and people that really are into media publishing. It as after all a server OS and Not desktop OS.
Rubbish - an OS is an OS - it is an api layer filter to the hardware, a memory manager and a tasking scheduler. There is nothing holding back 'media publishing' or gamers. DirectX 10? Check. Hardware Drivers? Same as Vista - Check. Able to run all the same applications? Check. Where's the problem? You might want to read: http://blogs.msdn.com/vijaysk/archi...indows-server-2008-as-a-super-desktop-os.aspx http://exo-blog.blogspot.com/2008/03/windows-2008-vista-done-right.html Of course, these guys are turning on Aero and superfetch, two 'features' I didn't ask for, don't want, and don't give a **** about. Especially since I've found that for my own uses superfetch slows my computer to a crawl compared to Vista without it (thanks vLite) - seriously who gives a flying fig if it makes programs load faster, if it drags all your software to a complete crawl - ranks right up there with all the garbage crapplets companies like Adobe bloat out ANYTHING you install their programs on. (CS3 REALLY pissed me off in that department - it's a ****ING paint program, what do I need 43 megs of crapplet loaded at startup for?)
This does amaze me since most server OS try to keep out most of the GUI, video, multimedia to a minimal. Reason less virus. Just less way for people to try to hack into the system.
Great information, I haven't made the switch myself but I am really looking at my options here. I do a lot of video editing so I might have to go with something like 4GB of ram.
That is not the reason seems there are issues with Vista: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2007-03-02-vista-problems_N.htm
I believe you should stop quoting sources to be honest. I know you are the Op but in this entire thread, there has not been a single source (and you have mentioned many) that is still relevant. In this case, you listed a source which has nothing to do with the Windows 98 reference in the post above you. That poster simply wanted to point out that running Vista on Win98 hardware would be an issue. The link you pointed to was written over a year ago. Due to hotfixes and SP1 from Windows for Vista and various patches for software to work properly with Vista, none of what was mentioned in that story is relevant anymore. Many of your comments are a bit out of touch with reality. Sometime I see you post and wonder if it simply to bump this thread and get more views (any maybe more ad rev from adsense assuming you are in the adsense shared revenue program here on DP).
What does the GUI have to do with virus? Traditional *nix OS do omit this to keep resources like memory and tasking slices free (which is the only way many OSS server apps can compete since M$ C compiler results in 10-15% faster code than GCC on the x86 platform) - having a GUI and multimedia has nothing to do with viruses. Having bullshit rubbish like activeX or outlook present is where 99% of your viruses come into play... Which is why on every windows install I do I rip out Outlook Express by the nerts, delete the desktop and quick-launch links to IE (though I leave IE7 in place for windows updates), install Opera and give the customer EXPLICIT instructions that using IE == ****ing your own computer up, if you MUST use IE, if it pops up "must install an activeX" - DON'T, and if you DO **** up your computer because you clicked wrong to that question, expect the labor bill to automatically be doubled for any repairs. How to secure windows - Rip out telnet services, rip out outlook (ANY type of outlook, express, office, whatever - It's still ****ING outlook - I'm amazed how many people go "You mean express, right?" - ****tards.), rip out windows messenger, use a browser other than IE, turn off that STUPID ****ING 'hide file extensions' rubbish so you can actually see what type of file you are clicking on... Hell, you follow that, it's likely you don't even NEED a firewall. Remember, the only thing a firewall does is block incoming ports that would only respond to input if some ****tarded service is installed to listen on that port (like windows messenger), or block malware from sending. Don't have anything that responds to inputs on unexpected ports, and don't have any malware, you don't need the firewall... Hence the problem with baseline windows installs, they have a bunch of bullshit services listening to a half dozen ports that NOBODY ACTUALLY ****ING USES. 'scuse the language, but one needs to be fairly BLUNT on this particular subject... I think though that's part of why I'm warming to server 2k8, it finally adds to it's 'server management' panel the ability to strip out a LOT of the built in rubbish nobody asked for, wants or needs.
I would have to agree with you on most of what you said. Except on the GUI. The reason you leave out the GUI is because those resources could be better used somewhere else. Assuming your running a server. Most people I know use ssh to remote to their servers. Their client (Desktop) is the one with the GUI. By the way I was just wondering if you ever tried Linux, FreeBSD, etc on your servers?
First of all there not irrelevant their are a lot of people who have not upgraded to SP1 and they should know that their Vista OS is vulnerable. Do you suggest that they have a vulnerable machine just to please you. As for the Articles have come from very good sources like PC World, ZDNet, etc. You might not like what they write about your favorite OS but it does not make them wrong. Remember just because you know all about updating your OS not everybody does. This is more for them then for people like you that love their OS.
After XP is EOL'd, we will be switching to linux strictly. After discovering some stuff about microsoft (and bill gates personal stuff) we've decided to make an ethical move away.
Untrue. Many people are still using XP and a large amount are downgrading from Vista to XP because XP is more stable and more compatible. I'm not going to say that there aren't any full scale professional businesses running on Vista, but I can tell you that they aren't going head over heels to get on it. XP fulfills most peoples needs and most are happy with it. I am personally pretty angry that XP is soon to be unsupported. You do realize that Macs are UNIX based right? I guess that was a rhetorical question seeing as how you are now banned anyways
Bill Gates finally got owned. I heard he stole the original Windows 3.1 code from someone else originally; I already hate MS as it is for the constant security holes their OS' come with; hopefully they will learn soon.
Uhm, that is what I said... see the part "keeping resources like memory and tasking slices free" I'm an old back-room AIX guy, who also dealt with Xenix in the 80's, Netware for the early half of the 90's, Solaris for the latter half of the 90's, and today maintains a mix of Solaris and Linux for servers. In fact, I'm a firm believer in the saying "*nix is for servers, windows is for workstations, and never shall the 'twain meet" - which is probably why I (and several others) keep stripping down server versions of windows for use as workstations. Using Unix for a workstation is like a trip in the wayback machine to 1991, at least so far as appications (and even simple desktop functionality) goes - while using Windows as a server is a bit like trying to haul a trailer with a Chevy Aveo.
its like i said earlier in the thread, its always rubbish when they release it and at its best as they replace it
I think Microsoft is trying to develop these operating systems too fast if they took a bit more time they may have been able to do a better job with vista.
Time has nothing to do with quality at least not when talking about Microsoft. It took 6 years for Vista to replace XP give or take a few months.