Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

wow arena add-ons | Bookmarks URL

wow arena add-ons | Bookmarks URL — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:24:59 GMT

Pingback from wow arena add-ons | Bookmarks URL

This post, now in 64 bits. | delajed

This post, now in 64 bits. | delajed — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:04:53 GMT

Pingback from This post, now in 64 bits. | delajed

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

mikegalos@msn.com — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:57:58 GMT

bettieblu

If you don't get a security confirmation prompt in ANY operating system when you try to change the date/time in "user" mode, you've got a BIG security problem.

And that whole "fade screen" you think is "lame" is the system going into a highly secured mode that prevents malware from spoofing or attacking the UAC system. Also VERY important for security.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

bettieblu — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:34:11 GMT

@Johnbaxter, Waethorn is right. UAC is good and LONG overdue for Windows. Its good because of what it does.

Windows XP is great OS still but its one glaring weakness is that 98% of users run in full admin mode. Getting XP to work in a limited user mode is difficult in that some apps, including MS apps cant do it.

So when MS added UAC to Vista it was good, great even. It forced people to run in limited user mode, which by its self blocks so much malware that kills XP. Its holds the hand of stupid users.

That all said the implementation of UAC is Fraking horrible. If you try to change the date and time in Vista, it pops up. Also that whole fade screen is just lame. In OS X and say Ubuntu you get about 1/10th of the pop up's asking for elevated privileges. Also those popups in OS X and Ubuntu always ask for a password, something UAC should do, and is on for limited users and can be turned on for Admins in Vista.

UAC is good, if you turn it off you are a fool. MS just needs to make it better.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

shark47 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:20:25 GMT

"There have been several occasions when you have got things wrong about Mac OS X and have been corrected by readers and other blog writers."

Paul has never claimed to be a Mac guru and doesn't offer advice to Mac users. There's the difference for you. Pogue and Goatberg claim to be PC gurus.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

shark47 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:13:04 GMT

"Why hire Justin Long, when they can get some old geezer to do the ads?"

Because, even though Goatberg doesn't realize it, he doesn't fit Apple's image of a perfect Mac user - the Justin Long type. Goatberg is too old, too bald, and too geeky - the typical PC user according to Jobs.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

shark47 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:03:39 GMT

" you might need more than 4 GB. Especially if you're running iTunes"

:-) Definitely.

If you just need a music player, I think Zune software is better for Windows users. For iTunes to perform reasonably on Windows, you might need this:

gizmodo.com/.../crays-first-windows+based-supercomputer-puts-a-64+core-datacenter-on-your-desk

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

Master3 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:56:26 GMT

"I've long suspected that Paul was unhappy (and perhaps even envious) that he's a B-list tech writer (not a bad thing), instead of being an A-lister like Mossberg, Pogue, etc...

Now I'm sure. His diatribes over the last couple of days lay open his insecurity for all to see.

What ever, Ocean and Drylight.

Neither of you are required to be here or to read anything Paul writes. If you find it so tedious to hear what he has to say, then find the door and move out of it.

After that snarky personal comment, I would have banned both of your IP addresses.

Both of you seem to need this site more than it needs you.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

Waethorn — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:45:05 GMT

@baxter:

"make matters worse, the out-of-box experience for these users runs directly into UAC, since they insist on installing most of their old favorites."

NO applications should be installed under user credentials. If you want to dispute that, then I'll conclude that you SUCK at IT.

"I've long felt that Microsoft missed a UAC mode: "Look, I'm going to be installing stuff today. Give me a break for n hours or until I tell you I'm done.""

I'll conclude that you don't have a clue about Vista either, since you CAN turn it off (assuming you're an administrator), and exactly for the reason you mention.

"Where exactly in that stunningly bad advise did Walt even mention switching to Mac OS X?"

Paul didn't say it was in the same comment, but Wally has said that before. That's his general argument about how to deal with problems on Windows, and it's marketing gold for Apple. Why hire Justin Long, when they can get some old geezer to do the ads?

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

Delmont — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:23:38 GMT

Reunson:

Oh please. Time for you go back to your fanatical Mac websites.

John Baxter:

Good comment.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

emuelle1 — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:29:30 GMT

I briefly subscribed to Windows Secrets' newsletter, until I realized it should have been titled "How to live in the past by extending Windows XP forever". In the time I subscribed, I don't think they revealed a single "secret" about Windows. All they did was complain about Vista and praise XP.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

reunson — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:14:09 GMT

"First up is the Wall Street Journal’s Walter Mossberg, a man who suggests switching to Mac OS X as a cure-all for whatever issue you may be having with Windows at the time. In today’s Mossberg’s Mailbox, Walt offers up some stunningly bad advice."

Where exactly in that stunningly bad advise did Walt even mention switching to Mac OS X?

So why was it necessary for you start your article off that way?

You were obviously trying to present him as a member of the so called "iCabal" and Apple shill with limited knowledge of Windows.

In the same way Paul, many readers and Mac related sites accuse of being nothing but a Microsoft shill.

You would have to admit yourself, that your knowledge of Mac OS X is very limited compared to your extensive knowledge of Windows.

There have been several occasions when you have got things wrong about Mac OS X and have been corrected by readers and other blog writers.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

drylight — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:54:46 GMT

"I've long suspected that Paul was unhappy (and perhaps even envious) that he's a B-list tech writer (not a bad thing), instead of being an A-lister like Mossberg, Pogue, etc..."

One needs more original content, not just re-blogging 90% of someone else's work and then adding a snide Microsoft fanboy remark here or there.

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

johnbaxter — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:59:09 GMT

Paul, seeing stuff like this out there must be really tiring.

It seems to me that one thing that is going on is that Apple and the "iCabal" have little to do with Microsoft's Vista perception problem. (I see the Apple ads as entertainment. All they've convinced me of is that I'm a Hodgman fan and Justin Long is playing (not IS, IS PLAYING) a snotty little brat.)

The problem is Windows users, some of the mainline press (mainline press = New York Times, Wall Street Journal (at least for a while longer until it's fully "Murdockized"), etc), semi-mainlne press (CNet and friends may be there, although CBS isn't doing CNet any good at all) and bloggers. Many of the above are sure that Vista is horrible. And they reinforce each other.

Many long-time Windows users (who resisted XP pretty strongly too) are in the "Ugh! Vista's different. I want my XP" category. So are many who started with XP. To make matters worse, the out-of-box experience for these users runs directly into UAC, since they insist on installing most of their old favorites. I've long felt that Microsoft missed a UAC mode: "Look, I'm going to be installing stuff today. Give me a break for n hours or until I tell you I'm done."

So by the end of the install orgy, they hate UAC (which they won't see often again) and by extension hate Vista. And tell everyone they know, in whatever platform they have (from Back Fence to CNet or Wall Street Journal).

On top of that, there were real problems for the first few months. Vista was not only very late; it was also somewhat early. By contrast, Mac OS X was not only very late, it was also much more early than Vista was (I had to boot into Mac OS 9 to run useful backups of 10.0 and 10.1, and making a dialup connection sooner or later led to a 10.0 kernel panic (think "blue screen of death")).

So what do I tell people now? Buy a Mac if you think you'll be happier with it than with Windows (one guy who did that proceeded to destroy his MacBook screen within months by closing the lid onto a pencil--one can do that with Vista or XP, too).

Or, if you prefer Windows, by all means forget about XP and go with Vista. The only exception there is folks who need XP for business reasons (which at least until recently around here meant anyone in real estate, since the local systems here require or required IE6 and nothing else). Recently, I"ve added "and don't be afraid of 64-bit".

re: Getting it wrong about Windows Vista x64

DRWAM — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:05:35 GMT

mdsharpe, you probably missed the post about 64 bit going mainstream, the first salvo. We mentioned that a great number of today's retail PC's are sold with Vista 64 bit installed. The last 3 laptops that I configured for friends was Vista 64, and the owners love them. I would love to see how it would run on my $400 laptop, just for giggles. As you all can tell, the darn thing is giving me plenty of them since I won't stop posting about it. My first laptop was a Dell Inspiron 7500 for about $3500. Seven years later I can guy a $400 laptop that puts it to shame. That's amazing, IMO.