New, Non-Cosmetic Features In Vista -- Ten Good Reasons To Upgrade

Who wants a LOW-END Vista to replace XP Pro SP2?

DSH

"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...

Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:43:21 -0800 from Justin :

For home, with Vista starting @ $99, it'll cost WAY LESS then a months
worth of gas.

Are you serious? I commute every day to work, and make the usual
number of other trips, and gas costs me about $40 a month.

What do you drive, a Hummer?

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

Hilarious!

This guy simply doesn't want any more smart input to his decisions ---- and
has locked his feet in concrete, then pulled the blanket down over his
head ---- after sticking bananas in both ears.

Note that he doesn't have the courage to use his Real Name either.

Further, it's not a matter of money -- it's a matter of sound decision
making, good policy, coherent thinking and avoiding PITA whenever possible.

One can buy fish in Many Markets.

A Great Benefit of the Free Enterprise System.

DSH

"TOM7601" wrote in message
...

1. If you want the fish, buy the fish.

2. If you don't want the fish, don't buy the fish.

In other words:

1. If you want to buy Vista, buy Vista.

2. If you don't want to buy Vista, don't buy Vista.

In either case, you have to convince yourself that you want to spend the
money, don't rely on others to make up your mind for you...
--
Tom - Vista, CA

"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...
Are you serious? I commute every day to work, and make the usual
number of other trips, and gas costs me about $40 a month.

A tank a month (or two)? I'd say you are below average.

Ok, hybrids aside!

Let's get some math in involved. You say you "commute"?

"to travel regularly over some distance, as from a suburb into a city and
back: He commutes to work by train."

Every day? I'll assume a normal work week so 5 days. I wont be absurd and
use the entire 7 days of "every day".

With the average gas price being $2.41 for regular:

http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/

That almost gives us enough info:

20 days
$40 dollars
$2.40 per gallon

= 16.6666666 gallons per month

Now we need to know what car you drive in order to establish how many miles
you can drive per gallon. For now I'll just use a consumer average since
we're talking about the average consumer.

http://www.bts.gov/publications/tran...er_Gallon.html

This is old, so I'll bump it up to 28MPG (which is being very generous)

28 * 16.666666666 = 466.666666 per month

466.666666 / 20 = 23.333333

23.333333 / 2 = 11.66666 miles each way

I would hardly call that a commute. Plus we haven't even factored in lunch,
weekends or errands.

"Usual # of other trips" would bring you down to 5-6 miles to and from work.
This is also the BEST CASE scenario. Imagine worse mileage or needing
higher octane.

You do realize that you can save the planet a little and ride a bike to
work? Even more reason you can afford Vista! Yeah!!!!

Or we can look at it a different way. I'll spare you the individual steps:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Tra...=485098&page=1

26 miles each way @ $40 a month comes to you're getting - 62.40 miles per
gallon. WOW!!!!!!!!

Nice list! However there will be fools that post they don't need any of
that and Linux already has it.

Take #3, I've mentioned it many times before, and people still claim XP has
that feature. Or that you can gain it from Windows Desktop Search.

For anyone that thinks XP already has the same search feature as
Vista....you're completely lost.



"Lang Murphy" wrote in message
...
1. UI now drawn by DirectX
2. Better security (perfect? naw... better? mayhaps...)
3. Better search
4. Bitlocker
5. Better help system/content
6. WinPE 2.0 (based on Vista) allows hot plug n' play of USB devices
(among other improvements over previous versions of PE)
7. Windows Easy Transfer
8. Windows Sync and Sharing
9. Full System Backup (lame compared to third party apps... yet, still, a
new, and some might say, valuable addition)
10. Parental controls
11. New media tools like DVD maker, etc.

Lang

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
No, Totally Mistaken -- as I've pointed out in previous posts.

No one has been able to come up with a bullet list of TEN good reasons to
move from XP Pro SP2 to Vista NOW.

The best one I've seen so far is the little box that springs up when you
move over a file to make sure you have the right one -- but I'm not even
sure about that one -- because with SP2 I THINK I already HAVE that
capability.

Microsoft needs to come up with that TEN POINT LIST -- if no one else
will.

Vide infra.

DSH

"BSchnur" wrote in message
om...

The problem you pose is in part, while worded as if this is a simple
straightforward request, it really isn't. Face it, you control the
rules -- someone tries to respond to what on its face is a simple
request, but then you have the option (which you readily exercise) of
rejecting the response.

No, the responses have mostly been quite trivial. Some, honest ones,
have simply been admissions that they can't do it -- even FIVE.

Ten good reasons -- someone replies with what *for them* represents a
good set of reasons and you (for your own reasons which for you might
well be quite reasonable) reject them as not being 'good' reasons.

Have you seen a list of TEN -- in bullet form? I certainly haven't.

The nature of your responses to those who have tried to reply suggests
that quite frankly, you are not *really* interested in switching to
Vista from your existing XP SP2 environment. No problem with that, (by
and large that's my own inclination at this point in time), but at a
certain point, your approach just might put folks off.

Too Bad. I'm open to EVIDENCE. SHOW ME SOME.

No, I'm not from Missouri -- but SHOW ME.

DSH

--
Barry Schnur

#6 goes further buy allowing you access to USB during install.


"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
Hey!

We may finally be getting somewhere.

Thank you kindly!

However, some of these seem to be incorporated in XP Pro SP2.

For example #6 and #9.

DSH

"Lang Murphy" wrote in message
...

1. UI now drawn by DirectX
2. Better security (perfect? naw... better? mayhaps...)
3. Better search
4. Bitlocker
5. Better help system/content
6. WinPE 2.0 (based on Vista) allows hot plug n' play of USB devices
(among other improvements over previous versions of PE)
7. Windows Easy Transfer
8. Windows Sync and Sharing
9. Full System Backup (lame compared to third party apps... yet, still, a
new, and some might say, valuable addition)
10. Parental controls
11. New media tools like DVD maker, etc.

Lang

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...

No, Totally Mistaken -- as I've pointed out in previous posts.

No one has been able to come up with a bullet list of TEN good reasons
to move from XP Pro SP2 to Vista NOW.

The best one I've seen so far is the little box that springs up when you
move over a file to make sure you have the right one -- but I'm not even
sure about that one -- because with SP2 I THINK I already HAVE that
capability.

Microsoft needs to come up with that TEN POINT LIST -- if no one else
will.

Vide infra.

DSH

"BSchnur" wrote in message
om...

The problem you pose is in part, while worded as if this is a simple
straightforward request, it really isn't. Face it, you control the
rules -- someone tries to respond to what on its face is a simple
request, but then you have the option (which you readily exercise) of
rejecting the response.

No, the responses have mostly been quite trivial. Some, honest ones,
have simply been admissions that they can't do it -- even FIVE.

Ten good reasons -- someone replies with what *for them* represents a
good set of reasons and you (for your own reasons which for you might
well be quite reasonable) reject them as not being 'good' reasons.

Have you seen a list of TEN -- in bullet form? I certainly haven't.

The nature of your responses to those who have tried to reply suggests
that quite frankly, you are not *really* interested in switching to
Vista from your existing XP SP2 environment. No problem with that, (by
and large that's my own inclination at this point in time), but at a
certain point, your approach just might put folks off.

Too Bad. I'm open to EVIDENCE. SHOW ME SOME.

No, I'm not from Missouri -- but SHOW ME.

DSH

--
Barry Schnur

And that is an IMPROVEMENT feature?

Hilarious!

I'll bet SP1 fixes that or SHOULD fix that, so you type your desired search
in -- then hit a button to start the search....

Currently it just sounds like AutoComplete run amuck.

DSH

"Justin" wrote in message
...

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...

But it starts the search immediately, whether you want it to or not?

It waits a split second for you to stop typing, but when I need to search
for gibberish for example, 008003654GHTF then I tend to type that out
slowly. The only reason it becomes a pain is because of the massive
amount of files I have. On a normal system you don't notice anything at
all.

So he commutes about 23 miles per day to and from work.

So What?

That's a quite reasonable commute for someone who is smart and has bought a
house in a nice leafy suburb.

Are you envious or just angry that he is doing far better than you?

Or is it both?

DSH

"Justin" wrote in message
...

"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...

Are you serious? I commute every day to work, and make the usual
number of other trips, and gas costs me about $40 a month.

A tank a month (or two)? I'd say you are below average.

Ok, hybrids aside!

Let's get some math in involved. You say you "commute"?

"to travel regularly over some distance, as from a suburb into a city and
back: He commutes to work by train."

Every day? I'll assume a normal work week so 5 days. I wont be absurd
and use the entire 7 days of "every day".

With the average gas price being $2.41 for regular:

http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/

That almost gives us enough info:

20 days
$40 dollars
$2.40 per gallon

= 16.6666666 gallons per month

Now we need to know what car you drive in order to establish how many
miles you can drive per gallon. For now I'll just use a consumer average
since we're talking about the average consumer.

http://www.bts.gov/publications/tran...er_Gallon.html

This is old, so I'll bump it up to 28MPG (which is being very generous)

28 * 16.666666666 = 466.666666 per month

466.666666 / 20 = 23.333333

23.333333 / 2 = 11.66666 miles each way

I would hardly call that a commute. Plus we haven't even factored in
lunch, weekends or errands.

"Usual # of other trips" would bring you down to 5-6 miles to and from
work. This is also the BEST CASE scenario. Imagine worse mileage or
needing higher octane.

You do realize that you can save the planet a little and ride a bike to
work? Even more reason you can afford Vista! Yeah!!!!

Or we can look at it a different way. I'll spare you the individual
steps:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Tra...=485098&page=1

26 miles each way @ $40 a month comes to you're getting - 62.40 miles per
gallon. WOW!!!!!!!!

How is it different? XP and 2000 and NT4 and most versions off office all
had indexing programs. Vista's search just seems a cutdown version of XP's.
You could generate document summaries in XP's (and 2000) search results.
"Justin" wrote in message
...
Nice list! However there will be fools that post they don't need any of
that and Linux already has it.

Take #3, I've mentioned it many times before, and people still claim XP
has that feature. Or that you can gain it from Windows Desktop Search.

For anyone that thinks XP already has the same search feature as
Vista....you're completely lost.



"Lang Murphy" wrote in message
...
1. UI now drawn by DirectX
2. Better security (perfect? naw... better? mayhaps...)
3. Better search
4. Bitlocker
5. Better help system/content
6. WinPE 2.0 (based on Vista) allows hot plug n' play of USB devices
(among other improvements over previous versions of PE)
7. Windows Easy Transfer
8. Windows Sync and Sharing
9. Full System Backup (lame compared to third party apps... yet, still, a
new, and some might say, valuable addition)
10. Parental controls
11. New media tools like DVD maker, etc.

Lang

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
No, Totally Mistaken -- as I've pointed out in previous posts.

No one has been able to come up with a bullet list of TEN good reasons
to move from XP Pro SP2 to Vista NOW.

The best one I've seen so far is the little box that springs up when you
move over a file to make sure you have the right one -- but I'm not even
sure about that one -- because with SP2 I THINK I already HAVE that
capability.

Microsoft needs to come up with that TEN POINT LIST -- if no one else
will.

Vide infra.

DSH

"BSchnur" wrote in message
om...

The problem you pose is in part, while worded as if this is a simple
straightforward request, it really isn't. Face it, you control the
rules -- someone tries to respond to what on its face is a simple
request, but then you have the option (which you readily exercise) of
rejecting the response.

No, the responses have mostly been quite trivial. Some, honest ones,
have simply been admissions that they can't do it -- even FIVE.

Ten good reasons -- someone replies with what *for them* represents a
good set of reasons and you (for your own reasons which for you might
well be quite reasonable) reject them as not being 'good' reasons.

Have you seen a list of TEN -- in bullet form? I certainly haven't.

The nature of your responses to those who have tried to reply suggests
that quite frankly, you are not *really* interested in switching to
Vista from your existing XP SP2 environment. No problem with that, (by
and large that's my own inclination at this point in time), but at a
certain point, your approach just might put folks off.

Too Bad. I'm open to EVIDENCE. SHOW ME SOME.

No, I'm not from Missouri -- but SHOW ME.

DSH

--
Barry Schnur

You haven't done a very Good Job of delineating how it differs from the
Search Capabilities in XP Pro SP2.

AND what you get when the Search is complete -- Good Technical Data?

I doubt it -- so why not just use Google?

DSH

"Justin" wrote in message
...

Nice list! However there will be fools that post they don't need any of
that and Linux already has it.

Take #3, I've mentioned it many times before, and people still claim XP
has that feature. Or that you can gain it from Windows Desktop Search.

For anyone that thinks XP already has the same search feature as
Vista....you're completely lost.

Still not explained in detail sufficient to make a judgment.

DSH

"Justin" wrote in message
...

#6 goes further buy allowing you access to USB during install.


"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...

Hey!

We may finally be getting somewhere.

Thank you kindly!

However, some of these seem to be incorporated in XP Pro SP2.

For example #6 and #9.

DSH

"Lang Murphy" wrote in message
...

1. UI now drawn by DirectX
2. Better security (perfect? naw... better? mayhaps...)
3. Better search
4. Bitlocker
5. Better help system/content
6. WinPE 2.0 (based on Vista) allows hot plug n' play of USB devices
(among other improvements over previous versions of PE)
7. Windows Easy Transfer
8. Windows Sync and Sharing
9. Full System Backup (lame compared to third party apps... yet, still,
a new, and some might say, valuable addition)
10. Parental controls
11. New media tools like DVD maker, etc.

Lang

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...

No, Totally Mistaken -- as I've pointed out in previous posts.

No one has been able to come up with a bullet list of TEN good reasons
to move from XP Pro SP2 to Vista NOW.

The best one I've seen so far is the little box that springs up when
you move over a file to make sure you have the right one -- but I'm not
even sure about that one -- because with SP2 I THINK I already HAVE
that capability.

Microsoft needs to come up with that TEN POINT LIST -- if no one else
will.

Vide infra.

DSH

"BSchnur" wrote in message
om...

The problem you pose is in part, while worded as if this is a simple
straightforward request, it really isn't. Face it, you control the
rules -- someone tries to respond to what on its face is a simple
request, but then you have the option (which you readily exercise) of
rejecting the response.

No, the responses have mostly been quite trivial. Some, honest ones,
have simply been admissions that they can't do it -- even FIVE.

Ten good reasons -- someone replies with what *for them* represents a
good set of reasons and you (for your own reasons which for you might
well be quite reasonable) reject them as not being 'good' reasons.

Have you seen a list of TEN -- in bullet form? I certainly haven't.

The nature of your responses to those who have tried to reply suggests
that quite frankly, you are not *really* interested in switching to
Vista from your existing XP SP2 environment. No problem with that,
(by
and large that's my own inclination at this point in time), but at a
certain point, your approach just might put folks off.

Too Bad. I'm open to EVIDENCE. SHOW ME SOME.

No, I'm not from Missouri -- but SHOW ME.

DSH

--
Barry Schnur

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
And that is an IMPROVEMENT feature?

Hilarious!

I'll bet SP1 fixes that or SHOULD fix that, so you type your desired
search in -- then hit a button to start the search....

Currently it just sounds like AutoComplete run amuck.

There is nothing to fix. As you type you get results. If you are referring
to my massive installation of text files then NO, the next server version
fixes that. I would never want Vista to change because I'm using a desktop
for a server level function.

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
Who wants a LOW-END Vista to replace XP Pro SP2?

We give up. Who? Are you assuming that's what everyone has?

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
That's a quite reasonable commute for someone who is smart and has bought
a house in a nice leafy suburb.

That end result was not decided. Go back and read. 23 miles both ways is
hardly considered a commute. More along the lines of a normal drive to
work.

Are you envious or just angry that he is doing far better than you?

Since you know so much about me, you tell me. Also, feel free to tell me
who else is doing far better then me. Let's how far you'll take yourself.

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
Still not explained in detail sufficient to make a judgment.

I'm sorry. How was the explanation not good enough for you to understand?

With Vista you can install drivers from USB and CD-ROM during the OS
install. With XP you can not.

You can dismiss it all you want. But you already have your "ten" list.

Your inability to understand the word "instant" is not my problem.

Your inability to understand the fact that through the same search action
you are also searching email on your system, is also not my problem.

It's been spelled out for you. If you can't read it then, too bad for you.
I don't anyone here really cares if you use Vista or not or if you use it
but don't even know the features under your nose.

All we care about is getting the info out there.




"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
You haven't done a very Good Job of delineating how it differs from the
Search Capabilities in XP Pro SP2.

AND what you get when the Search is complete -- Good Technical Data?

I doubt it -- so why not just use Google?

DSH

"Justin" wrote in message
...

Nice list! However there will be fools that post they don't need any of
that and Linux already has it.

Take #3, I've mentioned it many times before, and people still claim XP
has that feature. Or that you can gain it from Windows Desktop Search.

For anyone that thinks XP already has the same search feature as
Vista....you're completely lost.