are we seeing a backward migration to xp from vista

[fleamailman]

hi, yes I know this a linux forum but this effects linux I believe, is it just me or is it true that there are quite a few people who have backward migrated from windows stating either programs that no longer work or a general sluggishness under the specs of their computers demanded by vista, this and the fact the two computer makers(dell and levano) are opting for rolling out linux installed computers, has me wondering about the situation, so any links or opinions welcome

ok, my personal fear is that the next kubuntu release will try to compeat with vista on performance, which I don't think it should since the real merit of kubuntu is its ability to work with present specs without malware, therefore my hope is that gutsy will not require too much from the system while offering better wifi capability out of the box gui style as my hope is that people will see that since their laptops already offer all they need they will ask why they should dump them but I know I don't have a full view of things so do let me know how you feel on this subject, thanks

[myNigga]

Re: are we seeing a backward migration to xp from vista

About the "backward migration" from vista to xp, all I heard is that Vista is, arguably, more stable than XP. I don't know what this stable means, specially when talking about Microsoft products. People said it was like a move from Win98 to WinXP, which I found a bit exagerated. We all know MS doesn't rewrite things from scratch so Vista would take as much code from XP as possible. I don't use Vista, never used, never saw in action and won't ever use if possible. My machine had an installation of Win98SE which lasted from 2002 to 2006, 0 problems.

About the Kubuntu and Vista comparison, I tend to think that the more resources you give to a programmer, the more he/she will want. I am from a different, more classical chain of programming, follower of the great professor Edsger Dijkstra, and if he was alive, he would severely condemn how software development is being done. Just because you have a machine with, say 2GB of RAM, it doesn't mean half a dozen of simple programs will consume almost all of it... but it is what is happening: simple programs eating so much resources as if they were 3D renderers or Pi calculators. Not to talk about a huge memory leak in the early releases of Firefox 2.0, which is absolutely unacceptable from such an experienced project.
Part of this problem is absolutely users' fault. They pay for multi-core CPUs, huge and fast HDs, lots of memory and very power-hungry video cards, thinking they have an unbeatable machine in hands... they just don't know how mistaken they are. There is not a machine powerful enough to take on whatever stupid programmers throw on it. Hardware performance is solely limited by what it runs. Load 3 badly written programs on your dual-cpu rig and we will see it coming to its knees.
I particularly prefer performance over eye-candy programs, or at least try to get a good balance on it, raising "eye-candiness" up to a point where I don't feel a performance hit.
But while there are users willing to buy hardware to, errrr, run benchmarks (yes!!! benchmarks!!!), the industry is fed well enough to keep on bringing shiitty programs to the shelves. But they deserve it. I lost the counts of how many times I heard a friend saying: damn, your AMD dual-core with 1GB DDR1 runs this Linux thing much faster than my quad-core SLI 4GB DDR2 runs Vista! I laugh my ass off.

[dibl]

Re: are we seeing a backward migration to xp from vista

I also have the impression that Vista is yet another order-of-magnitude larger load of software burden on the CPU. I haven't actually run it, and don't intend to, but I know what happened to my good old Pentium III in the transition from Win 95 to Win XP -- it kinda died a slow death, notwithstanding my efforts to throw more RAM at it.

"Bloatware" is apparently the operative term.

[Snowhog]

Re: are we seeing a backward migration to xp from vista

Every new version of Windoze has 1) gotten bigger, requiring an ever larger HD for installation, and 2) continued the 'tradition' of including more bugs in the code. One could make a comparison between smokers and Windoze users. Even when you point out the dangers of using either product, there is almost universally a denial from the user! Go figure. So does that mean that Windoze users could be called addicts?