I wish they would just go back to naming them after the year. But I guess that is a marketing thing too, because hainvg an OS named Windows 2000 and now beining in 2005 makes it sound like you have betting sitting on your a$$ for 5 years to the laymen.
I've just finished intalling Windows Vista (Longhorn) Beta 1 on my computer.
Downloading the 2.5 GB .iso file from MSDN took a long time to complete. But it worth all the wait times in the end.
The installation lasted nearly for 2 hour. I have also the screenshots of the installation. I'm going to prepare a document on Vista installation with screenshots today and place the article on my site http://www.kodyaz.com
The installation completes with a few trick points and it runs smoothly after then.
I'm now going to install the drivers (graphics driver, etc.)
It's an XP clone with some new "special" effects. (ok, there are a few differences, but not enough to mention).
Weren't they promising something completely different - with a 3D desktop and such? It still doesn't look as good as OSX - and it doesn't even come with WinFX pre-installed (it's an optional add-on). How are they going to get full adoption of WinFX if it's
not part of the default install?
Why is it 2.4GB?! (Don't tell me it's the graphics when OSX still looks better and fits on a CD).
I hope there are some changes in the next year and a half...
War doesn't determine who is right, it determines who is left.
I remeber Windows XP took about 2 CD's when in beta, because they were including the debug files and the SDK. 2.4 GB is a pretty large install though. Also particle you are missing the big advantage. They moved from a bitmap interface to a vector based interface.
This is something that OSX still cannot claim.
ndinakar
All-Star
49092 Points
6868 Posts
Moderator
MVP
Windows Vista anyone ?
Jul 27, 2005 08:06 PM|LINK
Dinakar Nethi
Life is short. Enjoy it.
***********************
narayanas
Contributor
3320 Points
662 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Jul 29, 2005 11:33 PM|LINK
Morritt
Member
220 Points
44 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Jul 30, 2005 05:16 PM|LINK
nberardi
Star
11233 Points
2352 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Jul 31, 2005 08:59 PM|LINK
narayanas
Contributor
3320 Points
662 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Aug 01, 2005 12:12 AM|LINK
eralper
Contributor
6048 Points
971 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Aug 01, 2005 05:22 AM|LINK
I've just finished intalling Windows Vista (Longhorn) Beta 1 on my computer.
Downloading the 2.5 GB .iso file from MSDN took a long time to complete. But it worth all the wait times in the end.
The installation lasted nearly for 2 hour. I have also the screenshots of the installation. I'm going to prepare a document on Vista installation with screenshots today and place the article on my site http://www.kodyaz.com
The installation completes with a few trick points and it runs smoothly after then.
I'm now going to install the drivers (graphics driver, etc.)
Eralper
http://www.kodyaz.com
SQL Server 2012
ndinakar
All-Star
49092 Points
6868 Posts
Moderator
MVP
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Aug 01, 2005 04:45 PM|LINK
WOW. 2 hrs ?? XP takes 40 min's. I was thinking we would get better boot-up times..
Dinakar Nethi
Life is short. Enjoy it.
***********************
adwins04
Contributor
5803 Points
1162 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Aug 01, 2005 05:02 PM|LINK
Particle
Contributor
4700 Points
938 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Aug 02, 2005 12:09 AM|LINK
Weren't they promising something completely different - with a 3D desktop and such? It still doesn't look as good as OSX - and it doesn't even come with WinFX pre-installed (it's an optional add-on). How are they going to get full adoption of WinFX if it's not part of the default install?
Why is it 2.4GB?! (Don't tell me it's the graphics when OSX still looks better and fits on a CD).
I hope there are some changes in the next year and a half...
nberardi
Star
11233 Points
2352 Posts
Re: Windows Vista anyone ?
Aug 02, 2005 02:08 AM|LINK