Vista making Xp like ME!

yeah i remembered when i was still using ME on my old computer... it was really nice very good... but then suddenly xp came and was introduced... after that my ME looked like a crap and an ancient computer...

now vista came... will it make xp look like an ME and make you feel that when you're using xp your out of date and ancient?

 

Me=the worst version of Windows EVER.

 

better than win 98.LOL

 

absolutely. To anyone who is running WinME - upgrade at once!

 

I wouldnt go that far, I would take 98 over ME any day!!

 

the thread should be about vista making xp look old... now it becomes 98 and ME...LOL

 

so many people reallly hate ME... not for me though..haha

 

I think it's still too soon to say. First, I think XP probably took things too far in one direction with some of the interface concepts and stylings..... that is, whereas the Win95/98 style was a bit more refined, XP seemed to be a fair bit..... chunkier maybe? So a return to any sort of refinement will probably help. Vista is definitely going more in the sort of OS X/Aqua direction with the Aero interface, and I think it has the potential to make XP look even more outdated, but it really depends on how it is pulled off in the final version. At this point I think Vista still has enough interface inconsistencies and weirdness that XP would probably still win out since at least it is more generally consistent.

We'll just have to wait and see I think once the Vista UI is finalized to really know for sure.

 

I don't think it will. From what I've read about vista, the differences won't be that important. (and graphically, XP can be made to look just like vista).
I'd say XP to Vista is more like 95 to 98; Not as much of a jump as 98 to Xp, or 3.1 to 95.

 

actually ME is trully the worst version of Windows. There were so many memory leaks and other problems it's not even funny. Win98 was a lot more stable and faster.

I don't think Vista is a "must" upgrade as soon as it comes out. I think I'll wait for the first service pack of Vista before upgrading.

 

Anyone who upgrades to a Microsoft operating system before the first service pack is a braver man than I am. That's just asking for trouble. You can have your fancy interface, I'll take a much more stable and compatible operating system over that any day.

 

I agree with you iza... until xp came out, people were using either 95 or 98, and it didn't cause any major compatibility issues. One thing that is for sure with Vista is that it's not going to be an overnight replacement for xp--the versions that look pretty are too demanding for lower end systems, and the not-as-pretty versions don't offer the huge improvement that jumps like 3.1->95 or 98->xp did. Even today there are many places that will run windows 2000 on their networks--my school did up until last year and the place where I work does too. Many people (myself included) are not going to upgrade unless they feel its absolutely necessary, and a couple years down the line they're finding that new software isn't working for them anymore. I don't see that happening to xp--it may have its problems but its darn good at what it does...

 

I upgraded from ME to XP just about a year ago, so XP to me is still fresh and new and wonderful. With ME, the BSOD had become a regular event. XP does everything i want it to, and more.

I won't even think about Vista until SP2 is released.

 

I agree with the waiting until the sp1. I like my XP and if i feel nastalgic I just change Option to make it look like 98/ME. ME was just an addition to the 98 kernel a.k.a. 98 sp3. with a fancy new name.

 

ME sucked out of the box. Worse than 98-

XP will never become "like ME". It will eventually become obsolete, just like 98 is today, but it won't happen for a couple of years still. Just like new programs have only recently (in the last 2-3 years) started ditching Win98 support.

 

Windows XP is very good in my opinion. Windows Vista will have lots of security flaws, and a whole wide range of pointless features. Windows Vista will be a load of rubbish. It is the longest serving Windows OS aimed at home/home office/buisness racking up over 6 years of service soon.

 

better junk the vista then...hehe

 

I seem to be a minority these days. While I don't believe that Vista will make XP look like ME, I think it is a big step forward in a lot of areas. And contrary to Lil Mayz, Vista is currently the most secure version of Windows yet. So far, the only vulnerability Vista has shown is the virtualization hack that was discussed a few days ago on this site, and that required the user to tell Windows to allow the exploit to run. Sure, Vista still has a ways to go, especially in terms of UAC. It pops up way too much to be effective for the casual user; most will just click allow and go on. But this can only become better as time goes on. Already, reports indicate that the previous two builds since Beta 2 improve on UAC greatly. And without the user running as a super-user with universal privelages, viruses and malware will have a hard time installing into Vista. Also built into Vista are numerous other security features such as Windows Defender.

There's a lot more to Vista than just Aero, but nobody seems to want to look at it that way. They've redone the explorer, vastly improved IE, finally separated IE from Windows Explorer, improved usability through streamlined search and better Start menu, included numerous extras for the next generation of computing including integrated Media Center and better utilities like Disk Defrag and System Backup. This is only based on my limited use for the past month. Seasoned Microsoft Veterans and hard-core programmers will notice numerous other changes I'm sure, but that's just what I've noticed since I've used it. Hell, even movies look crisper and clearer in Vista than in XP. Is XP bad? Hell no. It's the best Windows version to date, and as stated it's been the best option for pretty much everyone for the past 6 years. But is Vista better? In my opinion, it is. It makes numerous leaps forward. Yeah, users will have to update their computers, but if they keep allowing the same old machines to run every Windows version, technology is never going to move forward. Vista is not just an operating system; it's a pathway and a push forward into the next generation, from 64-bit to DX10 to dual-core, you name it, Vista does it. How does that add up to a bad OS?

 

My major problems with Vista so far (not based on use, but on paper)

1. No idea of benefits, I've not seen any CLEAR list of better things in Vista beyond what XP currently does. Moving from ME to XP was a no-brainer, I'd gotten (like a number of people) to the once an hour computer freeze stage, so anything that didn't need a hard reset every hour (even 98) was better.

Currently I have NO CLUE as to what is really in Vista beyond a "pretty" new interface.

2. Security, while Vista may be more secure than XP, I doubt it will be much more secure (please Microsoft, prove me wrong).

3. Hardware Requirements, continuing microsofts "we can't program to save our lives" philosophy, Vista seems to require inordinate amounts of hardware straight out of the box for, as said in 1, little gain. I'm sick and tired of Microsofts cruddy programs that get bigger and bigger and save larger and larger files without actually any real reason for it.

Major Plus of Vista seems to be

1. 64 Bit, so for those with a 64 Bit processor, it MAY provide performance benefits (we'll have to see on that front).

2. New version of Direct X, which is supposed to be much nicer (again, we'll see on that front too).

 

seriously ME was just a travesty. Poor excuse for an OS. Ill stick with XP till I see the time to upgrade to Vista if needed.

 

I was unhappy with 98 and ME. I am not unhappy with XP. While XP may have some detractors, its a pretty good OS and it has been for 5 years. Is it perfect, no. But it does alright.

 

I think vista is going to be slow as hell on most machines, with lots of useless stuff.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Vista actually runs faster on my computer than XP. I'm not the only one who has said so either. I would say it's probably due to the precaching technologies it uses for integrated search. But it boots faster, runs faster, and sometimes it even shuts down faster. And this is just Beta 2.

 

The thing about security is that there are fundamental flaws in the basic design of windows itself, no? I mean when you look at the UNIX based/copied OSX and Linux i think windows has a long way to go.

Please correct me if im wrong.

Fortunately i've never had any real security problems on my 98 system or my 2 XP systems.

 

No one seems to want to show credit of what all the previous versions of windows did for us as society of conected souls. If we never had 3.1, would we ever have had win95? IT was each version that brought us to the next. Win95a would crash when you plugged a usb devise into it. Win98 SE would run on almost anything, and never need activation. Please show respect for the dearly departed/upgraded. How would a 1974 Ford Pinto compare to a 2006 Ford Focus? And Ford was making cars 75 years ago. I look forward Vistas release like looking forward to the new cars being released yearly. Each new model has its advantages, even if unrealized.

 

I still use 98 on my desktop. I tried to up it to Windows XP, but it wouldn't work. Now it is a double boot, one half XP Lite(no themes, no fancy interface) and the other is 98. So, if Vista is really going to take power away from my GPU for the OS, I seriously wouldn't want to upgrade. If it helps my GPU run games better, i still wouldn't want it for at least a few years. Let others suffer the early defects that closed source products tend to have, i always say. I'll probably get a desktop with Vista when i get a new desktop, but that is then.

 

You are correct. UNIX has always been a multi-user environment, whereas Windows has always been super-user. Vista will have a hard time changing this without breaking a truckload of legacy software. As I understand it, and I could be wrong, Vista's attempt at multi-user is similar to XP, in that it is more along the lines of smoke and mirrors as opposed to true multi-user. Also, and this is the biggest problem, they promise lots of new code in Vista. Totally rewritten! YAY! Until you realize that new code means new bugs and untested code. It will be interesting to see, I truly hope that they can accomplish what they have set out to do, for everyone's sake. In the end, it seems as though the major problem will be the user. People will pretty much ignore warnings if they come every ten minutes.

 

Windows 98 at release wasn't the best, but second edition was a great OS. I hope that you meant it that way..

 

Yeah, windows 98se is actually pretty good. I still use it on my old computer, havn't had any major problems that weren't my fault from messing around.

Theres actually still an active community building on it (theres a kernel update allowing it to run certain xp-only programs).

 

Windows ME is the worst OS ever.

 

I love XP, cant forget when I first got it 5 years ago, I was showing it off to all my friends who were still using 98.