__/ [ Oliver Wong ] on Tuesday 19 September 2006 18:34 \__
>
> "[H]omer" <spam@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:a5ivt3-659.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> __/ [ Gubo Dangle ] on Saturday 16 September 2006 20:57 \__
>>>> It happens that Roy Schestowitz formulated :
>>
>>>>> Xgl / Compiz Motion Blur
>>>>>
>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>> | Demo of motion blur on a bleeding edge build, completely
>>>>> | unedited.
>>>>> `----
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-Ln4xQhILs
>>>>>
>>>>> And that's a _low-quality_ video...
>>
>>>> And there's a point to this feature?
>>
>> I would have thought it obvious, since Gooey enhancements is pretty
>> much Vista's *only* selling point,
>
> False premise, so your conclusion is flawed.
>
> [...]
>>> http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~af380/MyDeskTop-Jun-22-2005.gif
>>
>> That's a more honest perspective of what you're actually getting in
>> terms of functionality, when you buy into Microsoft's
>> indoctrination.
>
> More honest than what?
>
>> That's the picture people see when they remove their
>> rose-tinted glasses.
>
> I disagree, but of course this is unverifiable either way.
>
> [...]
>>
>> I find it amusing that any Windows advocate can criticise the
>> development of visual enhancements in an OS, when the only thing
>> generating *any* interest in the forthcoming update to Windows, is
>> eye-candy.
>
> I wish you would not make factually false statement like these.
Oliver is right. Vista boasts links to online services, it has genuine
'advantage', and even digital rights management. I have seen Vista's list of
features (the infamous featureset) several times before. We have discussed
the _one. By. One._ in COLA. Everything that had some essence and value was
dropped. All that remains are a bunch of fancy names (yes, marketing is a
strength) with nothing underneath.
Just face the fact that Vista is vapourware. Microsoft engineers and managers
know it, so they gradually leave. It's Windows XP SP2 (or Windows Server
2003, its sibling) with some new artwork, including a login screen and mild
changes to the UI (some of which are deceiving and they detract). And
hardware support, as well as the prevalence of bugs (never mind that fact
that they dare call it a "_release_ _candidate_") makes it potentially worse
than XP, requirements aside. I know very well why I ditched the 'Windows
series' some time after Windows 98. That's just where they peaked. Or maybe
it was 95. I could have stayed, but I chose to move on and learn something
new that had prospects, a vision, and a maintainable codebase. Windows
development is somewhat like the poor handling of nuclear waste. It's all
about power, power, power (hog) and deadline, deadline, deadline. Eventually
you end up with a mess whose organisation was forever procrastinated. And
this in itself leads to waste. Waste of hardware that can no longer be
handled by the resource pig (XP) and resource gorilla (Vista); and waste of
bandwidth (SPAM, DDOS attacks, AV software, et cetera).
Many advocated in COLA are degraded to the level of sounding like parrots,
but it's amazing how many things Windows sticklers simply refuse to accept.
They think with their heart so to speak, rather than observe simple facts.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Windows XP: Dude, where's my RAM?
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/5 Tue Sep 19 04:29 - 04:29 (00:00)
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
