Marti van Lin wrote:
>I installed Vistas 7 RC1 on my Acer Aspire 7220, with these isues:
>
>- 1400x900 flatscreen was recognized as a 800x600 CRT;
>- Nvidia Geoforce 7000M GPU was recognized as a standard VGA adapter;
>- Nvidia nForce Ethetnet adapter was not recognized at all;
>- Atheros PCI WLAN adapter was not recognized at all.
>
>I downloaded the Vista drivers from the Acer website on my Fedora 10
>machine (Pleunix) and copied them to a USB thumbdrive. Installed them on
>Vista 7. However I was still unable to make any connection (neither
>wired nor wireless) to "the Internet".
>
>Vista 7 didn't understood that my Sitecom (Linux) wireless
>router/firewall/switch/nat only serves as a access point and switch
>behind another router. That is obviously too complicated for Vista 7.
>
>After 12 hours I gave up and re-installed Ubuntu 9.04 on that machine.
>
>My final conclusion: Vista 7 is even worst that Vista if it's not
>preinstalled.
>
>I am wondering if people are stupid enough to pay for that piece of
>junkware.
I recently put Win7 on my daughter's machine. She was running XP,
which again had become infected, despite our following all the "best
practices" (although she insisted on using IE, grrr).
I must condeed that it's working pretty well, so far. No issues with
the install, which was faster and easier than any previous Windows
install I've done. She likes it better, and indeed it seems noticably
improved over XP (as one would hope, being so much newer).
On the bad side, M$ continues with their idiotic ambiguity regarding
admin/user during the install. As before, you are asked "your name"
and you're defaulted to admin status and not told about this. Only if
you later create a second account is it suggested that you make it a
"limited user". Why they don't explain and encourage the creation of
the two accounts during install is a mystery.
Also, it still defaults to hiding extensions on known file-types. I
never understood that, either.
|
|
