Windows

[supertails]

How do you guys feel about Windows? I believe that Windows has a sense of invincibility. I really don't like Windows much anymore. It's way too expensive. A Windows OS XP and Vista cost more then $200. It's just really huge pieces of Bloatware. I use Linux and open office is great. Windows Office 2007 is basically the same as Open Office only difference is that Open Office can't save docx files or files with x at the end. I think Windows just put the x on the file format to make it sound more extreme. How does Windows Office 2007 basic differ from ultimate. Why is Windows using extreme or powerful word to describe products that are lame and annoying? What is the difference between basic vista and ultimate vista? I know they say it on the boxes which look really cool. They use the boxes cool and shiny looks to fool you into buying junk. I really don't see why my friends don't want to download Open Office. I will say time and time again that Open Office has everything you need in a Office program. Word, Power Point, Excel, Access which is what the give you on every Linux OS which I have used at least. If you have Windows and download it you can get more programs but the four I listed should be enough for everyone and they don't call it Word, Excel, Power Point, Access. They call it Word Processor, Presentation, Spread Sheet, Data Base. Those are all basically all the same has the other four Windows has. I know their are things Windows Office can do which Open Office can't. I can only think of one but it's pretty useless as docx files aren't in main use yet but why don't you give Open Office a try and see if what Windows Office has is worth the $100 + for it. For me I'll say no but it's your opinion if you say it's worth the $100 + for you.

 

[Gerri Shin]

While I agree with you that Windows is a bit on the pricey side and that they do seem to have some sort of superiority complex about them when they came out with XP it was actually a nice OS. it worked; and that is what most computer user want. Now in terms of Vista, they could have waited to release. they had a lot of neat features in some of the beta versions when it was still under the code name Longhorn, but they were cut out at the last minute. I also really feel that 6 different versions of the OS is going a little far; I can handle having the two that XP had (Home and Pro). the only difference between the Home and Pro of XP was the fact that Pro had a few more Data protection protocols in it that helped when it came to business networking. Vista, on the other hand, comes in 6 different versions where the only difference are the amount of 'New' features they put in.
Companies like Apple and all the Linux Distribution companies have the right idea, in my opinion. they only offer two versions of the OS; Server and Home/ Business. How much simpler can you get. one OS that works great for both Home & Office and another that works great as a server.

Microsoft Office has been the industry standard of Office Suites for a very long time, this is mainly due to the simplicity of the programs and the ease of use. When Microsoft introduced Office 2007 they took the route of the documents created to a whole new level. they began to use XML within the documents from everything from Excel spreadsheets to Access databases to Word Documents. Office 2003 and before didn't use XML (with the exception being InfoPath). OpenOffice.org has not quite added the use of XML to their Office suite, however for the price and the wide range of people still using Office 2003 and earlier versions, OpenOffice.Org is still the best Office suite for price and functionality. (Note: If you do use MS Office 2003 there is a plug-in from MS that will allow Office 03 to read and write Office 2007 documents)
Just like windows has done for years with it's Office Suites it comes an a few versions. however the difference between the version of Office is not the same as how they differentiate the OS versions. Office versions differ by What programs are in the Bundle. In the Student and Teacher version, you get the basics that most everyday Students use. (Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and OneNote) The Standard is the basic suite for most home owners that aren't usually going to use their Home computer for anything other than the occasional letter to family members or keeping track of finances using Excel. The Business version contains most of the programs that a small business would use to be in contact with clients, partners, etc.. and the Ultimate version just contains the best of every Office product made by Microsoft.

In my opinion the best route to go whether you're on a tight budget or not is OpenOffice.org (NeoOffice for people on Mac). It can handle just about any Office file type you throw at it, except MS Office 07 of course. but If you must go with a version I urge you to do you're homework and find the suite that suits your needs.
If you happen to be on an Mac I should mention a little about the different options there. Possibly the best free suite out there is NeoOffice. NeoOffice is based off o OpenOffice.Org so it's basically the same thing, just geared for the Macintosh system.
However since you cannot get MS Office 2003/2007 you will have to go for either the Mac versions 2004/2008 Or you can go with Apple iWork.
MS Office 2004 came in 2 versions: Student & Teacher and Standard, while MS Office 2008 comes in three versions: Home and Student, Standard, and Special Media Edition. The New Special Media Edition is basically the standard edition with extra support and it comes with MS Expressions Media, which is Microsoft's take on a media library organizer (I thought that's what iLife was for?). Now I don;t have any version of MS Office for Mac so I can;t sa much except what I understand from the website, Now iWork is a little different. I've been using the trial version and have actually been pretty pleased with iWork 08. For a paid Office suite I'd hazard to say that this is worth the money. Comparably iWork is only $79USD and MS Office 08 is $149(student) $399 (standard) $499 (Media Edition) so I'd pick iWork 08 over MS Office 08 any day, but since I'm tight on $$ right now I'm sticking with NeoOffice.

Edit: I just realized that NeoOffice Can in fact save to the DocX format of MS Office 07 (i've included a picture of all the formats that NeoOffice can save to)

 

[supertails]

What's so special about XML anyway? How is XML going to make my document so much better? You would actually pay for IWork? Why? Isn't in basically the same as Neo? Microsoft isn't a bit pricey it's very pricey. Media Edition is half the price of my Laptop. Ultimate Vista is more then half my Laptop and it doesn't even work right. I agree that Linux PC and Server are a good way to split an OS. But why can't Windows do that? Why can't Windows have a cheap Office program for under a hundred dollars and have everything you need. Why do they need all that money anyway? For Lawsuits and News appearances? Windows is so losing that new Lawsuit too. At lease I hope they do.

 

[Gerri Shin]

XML basically just makes it much easier to save media files withing the office documents easier as well as providing a easier way to allow for file conversion. According to some sources as Microsofts MSDN pages, moving to using XML formats in their office documents will be one step closer to standardizing fie formats. considering that IBM and SUN Microsystems both use the ODF file formats.

As for Me using I work, I would use it in conjunction with NeoOffice. I really like Keynote and Numbers a lot. they are actually very easy to use and both have some great templates and features that MS Office and NeoOffice both lack. However for Word documents I will stick with NeoOffice, it does a little better job than Pages does. For what MS Office 08 does is, It is way over-priced. I mean seriously, $149 for the most basic version? o_0 You can get the same power in NeoOffice!

Well technically they did split their OS like that, (Windows Server 03/08) bute then they split it again once they got to the Desktop version. My theory, which is by no means Fact, is that Windows reasons for splitting up the desktop version was to allow people with older slower computers to upgrade to Vista without having to upgrade alt in their computer. but what they Probably anticipated was that people see the features they think they need or want and they get that, which makes then spend wither more money upgradeing or will just get them to buy a new PC.
My belief is that Windows is just in for the money now, they could easily lower the price down to say $200 for Vista Ultimate and still be able to stay afloat.

 

[supertails]

I agree with you on that but I'm not switching the XML documents until it's used by mostly everyone.

 

[supertails]

Are you drunk or something? Vista is only in 3rd world countries. Was I dreaming when I walked into best buy and saw Vista? I don't think so and one you should try it and not just look at it. Office should be about speed and ease of use not eye candy. You choose Microsoft Office because it's eye candy. You like it because of all the useless graphics and maybe even the paper clip.

 

[supertails]

What the difference it's all vista?

 

[supertails]

You narrowed it to Home Basic and Home Premium. Most of the others are for businesses right? They have different versions of an OS to so people can pick what they need. Do the 3rd world countries have those different versions to see what is best for them but with just the Starter Vista? What if you don't know what you need or not? Do you have the most basic or the most advance. What version of Vista is best for you? Just so I can get a clearer understanding of the differences. Do you think Windows should make them work for all computers instead of one version for this and one for the other? One XP is for home and one is for Businesses.

 

[supertails]

They have Starter because it's assumed computers in those regions need something less resource intensive and people need something that costs less. The other editions may be available there as well, I dunno. All I know is Starter isn't sold in the largest countries, and that's the point I'm making. It's not sold where the average computer user lives, and is therefore out of the running.

Okay. Do you believe the starter is right for everyone there and I know that there are people in the US that don't have a lot of space or PC resources too?

When you're buying a computer from places like HP, Dell, etc., they have explanations (not only on their website, but buy the people over the phone as well) that explain the differences. They HELP you decide which. Again, remember that I'm talking about the average computer user.

As far as buying the OS separately, people who do that and understand how to install it / upgrade themselves would more than likely already know what version they want/need.

That makes sense.

No, because different people have different needs. o_O; I don't want crap crammed into my OS that I'm not going to use. Wasn't it you who was just saying that Windows is "bloatware"? In my opinion, splitting Vista into different editions for people with different needs is an excellent way to start fixing that.

I don't really agree with that. With Linux you get a PC version and a Server version and I believe that's all you need and It's not bloated at all and you can install everything you need and it starts you off with just the basics and you can install everything else with the Add/Remove button or go online. You know Windows is basically going to be bloated no matter what version you have because computer companies put so much trial software on them.

So then three to choose from, but that's still just one more than the previous generation. And again, like I said, the average person will just be looking at Home Basic and Home Premium.

I don't know because Vista has bad reputation and I used it and hated it.

 

[Gerri Shin]

Okay. Do you believe the starter is right for everyone there and I know that there are people in the US that don't have a lot of space or PC resources too?

While it is true that there are people with less resources than others, and Microsoft is Ok with them sticking with XP for a little while. the only reason MS is making such a big deal about Vista is because Vista is It's newest version. of course they want to promote the heck out of it. However they have said that they will continue their support of XP.

I don't really agree with that. With Linux you get a PC version and a Server version and I believe that's all you need and It's not bloated at all and you can install everything you need and it starts you off with just the basics and you can install everything else with the Add/Remove button or go online. You know Windows is basically going to be bloated no matter what version you have because computer companies put so much trial software on them.

Technically, the OEM versions of Windows don't really come a tremendous amount of trial software. It's really the companies like Dell that shove loads of trials and bloatware onto the new machines.
While a agree that Windows does need a better way to uninstall these trials, I don't believe that is going to happen very soon, due to the reliance Windows has on it's registry. (It's the registry that is possibly Windows worst feature, in that every time you install, uninstall, or do pretty much anything it gets information added to it)

I don't know because Vista has bad reputation and I used it and hated it.

Vista's reputation is that It is a resource hog, which it is; but you can get around that by simply turning off useless features like Flip 3D, the visual tool-tip, and other startup programs; and that it crashes every few hours. I work as an Asst. IT Manager at a school and at my home, I oversee mostly XP computers, however I've used Vista and a few of the principals and teachers have gotten new computers with Vista on them and to be honest I haven't had too many problems with them. the biggest problems lie in the Driver signing program (which I've had trouble getting Vista to work with the SmartBoards), but if your just using Vista to browse the internet and use MS Office, then Vista is great and , to some, Aesthetically pleasing over XP.

 

[benji]

Why am I even replying to this? o_o;

Okay. Do you believe the starter is right for everyone there and I know that there are people in the US that don't have a lot of space or PC resources too?

He never said that the Starter version was "right for everyone", and your statement just contradicted itself. You stated that there are a lot of people in the United States who don't have good hardware, which would actually affirm the statement you are trying to refute (which wasn't stated by Audy, anyways).

I don't really agree with that. With Linux you get a PC version and a Server version and I believe that's all you need and It's not bloated at all and you can install everything you need and it starts you off with just the basics and you can install everything else with the Add/Remove button or go online. You know Windows is basically going to be bloated no matter what version you have because computer companies put so much trial software on them.

Yeah, read what Gerri Shin said. A lot of the ads/trial software pre-installed on your computer are from the manufacturer (who just want to make a few extra bucks). It's all the same if you install a boxed Vista distribution or a boxed Linux distribution -- no trial software or ISP ads.

As for speed, if you really hate the shiny new effects, turn them off. Or revert to Windows 2000.

If you want pretty and shiny, get a mac. If you want powerful and/or free, get Linux. If you want versatile (has the most applications developed for it), get some version of Windows. No big deal. You don't really need to make a million threads about bashing Vista. =p

 

[Legobricks]

98, 2000 & XP: What's not to like?
Vista: What's to like? The UI? No, I don't even like that.

Basically that's it, Windows has its ups and downs, but I'm perfectly content with it.

 

[supertails]

He never said that the Starter version was "right for everyone", and your statement just contradicted itself. You stated that there are a lot of people in the United States who don't have good hardware, which would actually affirm the statement you are trying to refute (which wasn't stated by Audy, anyways).

It didn't contradict itself. I was just agree that a lot of people don't have a lot of PC resource and asked a question while saying it. My third statement said that Linux is right for all PCs depending on year don't put Linux on a computer 20 years old as it's too old but basically speaking all modern computers can run Linux.

Yeah, read what Gerri Shin said. A lot of the ads/trial software pre-installed on your computer are from the manufacturer (who just want to make a few extra bucks). It's all the same if you install a boxed Vista distribution or a boxed Linux distribution -- no trial software or ISP ads.

As for speed, if you really hate the shiny new effects, turn them off. Or revert to Windows 2000.

If you want pretty and shiny, get a mac. If you want powerful and/or free, get Linux. If you want versatile (has the most applications developed for it), get some version of Windows. No big deal. You don't really need to make a million threads about bashing Vista. =p

I would rather revert to XP but XP is expensive and I don't want to spend $200 for a OS. I said that the computer companies put trial software on the OS not Windows. Windows is a software company not a computer company. I said that it's the shiny box not the effects. I said the box look really shiny and cool and that it fools people. I know I don't have to make a million threads bashing Vista but I do it because I care. I don't want others to be burned like me.

98, 2000 & XP: What's not to like?
Vista: What's to like? The UI? No, I don't even like that.

Basically that's it, Windows has its ups and downs, but I'm perfectly content with it.

While you are right about Vista and the others. But they all slow down after time, Linux doesn't.

 

[Gerri Shin]

the only reason Windows slows down over time is that it is the only mainstream OS that has what is called a Registry, which is basically an ever-growing log of events on your system. If you install/ uninstall programs or change any setting an entry goes onto it. over time the log just gets bigger and seeing as reading the registry is part of the start-up and run procedures your computer will slow down. the best way to avoid the dreaded 'computer taking so freaking ever that I'm going to throw it out the window' coplex is to make frequent backups of your files and then do a refomat and reinstall of the whole OS every 3-4 months.

 

[supertails]

Why would you want to buy a XP of Vista disk and reinstall the whole thing? What would be the point in doing that every 3 months. I know that doing that would make your computer faster and like new but why would you want to reinstall everything and beat games again if you have Windows to play game on. With Linux and Mac you only need to install it once.

 

[Virtual Chatot]

Why would you want to buy a XP of Vista disk and reinstall the whole thing? What would be the point in doing that every 3 months. I know that doing that would make your computer faster and like new but why would you want to reinstall everything and beat games again if you have Windows to play game on. With Linux and Mac you only need to install it once.

Well, no one likes a slow computer, and I have to ask...Who would want to beat a game again after beating it before?

 

[Gerri Shin]

DOn;t ask me why Microsoft does what it does, but 3-4 months is the recommendation I give, and it's worked out for as long as I remember. besides you can always backup your save files of that game and restore them after you re-install everything.

 

[supertails]

Well, no one likes a slow computer, and I have to ask...Who would want to beat a game again after beating it before?

MEEEEEE!!!! I have beaten sonic 2 so many time I can't even remember. I love beating games all over again but I like it better when I can chose the levels of my choice. Like Army Men 2.

DOn;t ask me why Microsoft does what it does, but 3-4 months is the recommendation I give, and it's worked out for as long as I remember. besides you can always backup your save files of that game and restore them after you re-install everything.

I may try that.

 

[Cherrim]

Considering I don't even see Mac OSX available for stand-alone purchase at the big box stores here (wtf!?) and Linux doesn't count as far as prices go, I don't think it's fair to call Vista bloated for its price. I'm not going to go on a huge search to find the real price of OS X, but I can't imagine it's that much lower than Vista. That said, as far as I know, most people who have Vista now only have it because they bought a new computer that came with it pre-installed, so price isn't even an issue. I know that's how it was for both the Vista computers in this household.

As for the operating system itself, I've grown up with Windows so I'm a little biased. I haven't used Linux before (not extensively, anyway) and I also have barely touched OS X (and don't really want to--it's just eye candy to me), but for now I'm perfectly content with Windows.

Vista itself honestly isn't what everyone makes it out to be. I've never had a problem with the drivers for ANY of my computer peripherals. Even my Eyetoy which wasn't even made to be a computer webcam works flawlessly and Vista installed it itself, I believe--I didn't even have to do the hunt for drivers like I did with XP and 2000. As for programs, some were a little glitchy back in, say, January of last year when Vista was still very new. But most current and still-updated software titles are Vista-compatible for the most part. Everything I use works fine, at any rate. I get hiccups in running the OS, but hey, I got even more with XP when I used it. I'm not sure what it's like aside from the user-end (I don't pay attention to security issues and such, so lol, maybe there are a lot of those?), but I still think it's a perfectly fine OS that definitely doesn't deserve all the bad rep it gets. :\ It's a bit of a memory hog but hey, if you have the RAM to support it, you don't really notice anything, I find.

I also quite like Vista (or Windows in general, rather) simply because it IS so compatible. Sadly, one of my main reasons for being so opposed to owning a Mac as a main computer is that Windows Live Messenger won't work on it and I don't want to use one of the Mac substitutes for it. Lame, I know, but hey, it's a big deal to me since that's a program I use a LOT and I love the convenience of having it with all the extra perks installed. It's not just that, either, but a lot of other programs just don't work with anything but Windows and the "comfort programs" that I have on this OS are just too strong a pull to let me actually use another OS to its full extent.

That said, I guess this is also an Office suite thread? o_O; So uh, yeah. I used to use Office 97 for yeeears until dad brought home a disc with Office '03, which I used for a few months before I ended up with the most recent Office release. I don't adore the new setup, but it still works fine. Speaking of which, don't put words into a company's mouth. Just because they add an "x" at the end doesn't mean they're trying to market their product as extreme. Because honestly, I don't think I'd be very impressed to hear that my office suite can word process to the extreme. I don't personally know the difference between files saved under the old and new extensions (nor care), but I certainly know a letter wasn't added just to make it sound cooler.

Anyway, I haven't used Open Office, but I have heard fairly good things about it. I just don't see the point in installing it when all the computer I use have the MS Office Suite on them anyway. I'll try it out one day but... probably not until I start playing around with Linux.

You know Windows is basically going to be bloated no matter what version you have because computer companies put so much trial software on them.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Computer companies put so much trial software on. Not Vista. Vista itself doesn't come installed with HP Checkup, HP Quickplay, etc. But my laptop did because it's an HP laptop. Do I need all that crap? No, of course not. Microsoft didn't include it with their OS though. If I bought the OS straight from a store (and there's your original $200 argument) and installed it fresh from the box, I'd get just the operating system and none of the extra trial stuff that DOES make it "bloated" so... yeah. :|

 

[Gerri Shin]

Lightning, makes some very good points, and I'll just fill in Mac OS X price.
Mac OS X is priced at $129 (1 user license) or $199 (5 user license)
and re-iterate:
Vista is actually getting better, believe it or not. (keep the bias out of here, if possible)
and If you have access to MS Office, use it.