I've been subscribing to http://www.longhornblogs.com/ (well more like regularly visiting it) for awhile now, and I really think that Longhorn (Vista) is quite neat looking (UI-wise). It is more integrated with the browser than ever, but it's a helluva a lot nicer looking than XP was, by default.
I think that the world should give this new version of Windows a shot before denouncing it.

Well, I agree that the looks are great. It fits my taste as I like the flashy crystal/glass/aqua stuff with transparencies and such. However, ones computing isn't just in looks and aside for that, there doesn't really seem to be much more of benefits than that.

GNU/Linux has everything Vista has, including the looks if you want it and is free (both as in freedom and if you choose so as in price as well).

For Windows you have to pay a good deal to get a system you wont be free to use in any other way except for what is allowed by MS, not to mention the DRM in place to further ensure that you are not free. Even if it was the eight world wonder, for these reasons I wouldn't deem it worth of trying, but the fact that it doesn't even have that much to show is just strenghtening this point.

Thanks
Daniel

I just subscribe to the Don't Knock It Til You Try It theory.

Once I have tried the leaked version of the Alpha version of this Windows, and here's what I got:

- Installing takes >3 GB of HD, and unlike a GNU/Linux distro which contains everything to make the computer at lease usable, it still contains nothing and you also need a good amount of other MS software such as Office, Visual Studio, etc.
- Booting takes >400MB of RAM (with no programs installed)
- Last but not least, _nothing_ but the "product activation" feature actually works

I am a Free Software advocate and user, one who believes in it. And as such I believe an unfree operating system is a drain on our culture as it makes people non free. That alone is enough for me not to even consider giving an operating system such as Windows even a chance, as long as it is a proprietary OS.

And no, it is not a closed minded view as I already know what proprietary software is and what it means. It is not about what Vista has to offer technically, even if it had all things in the world. It is about it not offering the most important thing of all: freedom.

The technical poornes I can presume can just add up to the list of reasons.

Thanks

Microsoft again presumes that everyone is able to fork out as much money for a new expensive and fast machine plus for as well expensive Windows OS that doesn't seem to be providing much value for your investment, but in a contrary takes value: your freedom.

Thanks

F/OSS software is the only thing I want to use in the long run. Vista is just another attempt to rip you, me and rest of the society off, even more. Finally they actually have to make something that looks reasonably good (the UI) in order to stay within the competition.

Mhh. I wonder, are they abolishing the blue screen of death? :-D

I'd say so. With Windows XP, by default the blue screen was replaced with a small memory dump and an automatic reboot. The blue screen of death, while a beautiful metaphor, really doesn't represent Windows any more.

I was going to post before, but I wasn't logged in for some unfathomable reason. Thankfully for humankind, Vista isn't going to be the lock-down of all lock-downs as it was originally intended (From what I've read). All I can see it being right now is another version of Windows. Sort of another step up as XP was to 2000.

Well, I must say microsoft tends to find very apt names for windows versions. "XP" clearly is the smiley that means "I feel very sick". And "vista"? Check out what it means in sanskrit: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24869

'nuf said.

Blind microsoft bashing aside, it is obviously visible now that all those new features were vaporware to try to make you wait for this new version of windows instead of using linux or macOS.

I didn't get it :/