Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Only Vista is so bloated the vendor lies about its requirements

  • Subject: Re: Only Vista is so bloated the vendor lies about its requirements
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 19:43:27 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / ISBE, Manchester University / ITS / Netscape / MCC
  • References: <8xQWg.46997$KR1.39474@bignews2.bellsouth.net> <pan.2006.10.10.18.32.44.571634@linetec.nl>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ Richard Rasker ] on Tuesday 10 October 2006 19:32 \__

> Op Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:16:30 -0400, schreef DFS:
> 
>> http://www.novell.com/products/desktop/sysreqs.html
> 
> Learn to read. It sums up several CPU's, and it lists x86 as the first one.
> In my book, that means *any* Pentium will work. But OK, let's stick to the
> recommended specs, and make the old comparison:
> 
>             SUSE Linux ED            Vista                Relative specs
>                              Microsoft     Real world(*)      (SUSE=1)
> 
> CPU                2.4GHz         1Ghz              2GHz     0.42/0.83
> RAM                 512MB          1GB               2GB        2/4
> Graphics Proc.      [any]      Big Iron    Real Big Iron        2/4(est.)
> Graphics RAM   32MB(est.)         128MB            128MB        4(est.)
> 
> HD space            2.5GB          15GB             15GB        6
> 
> Now, we multiply the relative specs to get a final score of SUSE vs. Vista
> hardware recommendations of 1:6.7 according to Microsoft, and a staggering
> 1:53 when we ignore Redmond's usual lies, and check out what's *really*
> needed to get the stuff working in an acceptable manner, as reviewed here:
> 
> *: http://weblog.infoworld.com/smbit/archives/2006/06/vista_hardware.html
> 
> And oh, I didn't count in the HD requirements - as these would skew the
> result beyond a reasonable comparison; besides, even a new 40GB drive is
> hard to come by these days, so HD space is no issue whatsoever.
> 
>> So, it's slow, it's buggy, and it's bloated.
> 
> That'll be Vista all right!
> 
>> What more could you ask for: free?  I sure as hell hope so...
> 
> Um, no. People are expected to pay hundreds of dollars for Microsoft's
> GigaBloat Crapware, plus hundreds of dollars *again* to get the required
> hardware - especially if they fell for Microsoft's lies about the system
> requirements, and bought Vista expecting to easily "upgrade" (ahem) their
> current machine. And what do they get for that? A shiny new front end for
> a crappy, extremely resource-hogging application launcher.

Don't forget Live OneCare. Without protection, the system will shortly be
compromised and turned into a SPAM-spewing zombie. The cost of Onecare
should be considered annually and, on its own right, it equates to that of
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 (for business customers).

For the record, I run SUSE on a machine with 256 MB or RAM. It copes with
plenty of applications that are run simultaneously. The hardware cost just
165 quid at the time and I suspect it costs under 130 quid at the moment
(was 127 last year at Best Buy). I'm getting a new jumbo-sized monitor in
about 20 minutes! Can't wait...!

Best wishes,

Roy

-- 
Roy S. Schestowitz      |    "ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI"
http://Schestowitz.com  |  GNU is Not UNIX  |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy      pts/4                         Tue Oct 10 15:44 - 15:44  (00:00)    
      http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index