<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Vista: Windows ME&#8217;s Successor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/</link>
	<description>Various stuff from some guy.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:39:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fredrik</title>
		<link>http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/#comment-998</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Fredrik]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2007 13:28:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipx86.com/blog/?p=234#comment-998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My friend just got a new laptop with the vista approved tag on, which imo should garantee hardware working? Im a linux geek so i opposed the installation but he wanted it. What he wanted to to was to play the game openarena on it using his wlan card atheros bg something. He could play about 20 s then had lagspikes as hell and 60-70 ping, i sat beside him with my laptop with intelcard wifi in linux and had 0 lag and 30 ping on the same connection. I did a thourough research about the card on the net and found out that everyone running vista had the same problem.... tried all of the purposed fixes nothing did it. Even browsing in vista was catastrophical. allthough he had dual boot on the machine and with xp and atheros all worked nicely... I used to run vista on my intel machine for 4-5 months ago, all horrible... ok its still in development but DONT PUT TAGS ON NON WORKING HARDWARE THEN?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! at least in linux u can choose if u want to run the devel version or stable... and its free... scary...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My friend just got a new laptop with the vista approved tag on, which imo should garantee hardware working? Im a linux geek so i opposed the installation but he wanted it. What he wanted to to was to play the game openarena on it using his wlan card atheros bg something. He could play about 20 s then had lagspikes as hell and 60-70 ping, i sat beside him with my laptop with intelcard wifi in linux and had 0 lag and 30 ping on the same connection. I did a thourough research about the card on the net and found out that everyone running vista had the same problem&#8230;. tried all of the purposed fixes nothing did it. Even browsing in vista was catastrophical. allthough he had dual boot on the machine and with xp and atheros all worked nicely&#8230; I used to run vista on my intel machine for 4-5 months ago, all horrible&#8230; ok its still in development but DONT PUT TAGS ON NON WORKING HARDWARE THEN?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! at least in linux u can choose if u want to run the devel version or stable&#8230; and its free&#8230; scary&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart Parmenter</title>
		<link>http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/#comment-997</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stuart Parmenter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:04:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipx86.com/blog/?p=234#comment-997</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just disable UAC.  It causes way more problems than it solves.  Disabling it was the first thing everyone running vista recommended to me when I recently installed Vista64.  That said, I&#039;m having no real problems with things crashing randomly]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just disable UAC.  It causes way more problems than it solves.  Disabling it was the first thing everyone running vista recommended to me when I recently installed Vista64.  That said, I&#8217;m having no real problems with things crashing randomly</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tim</title>
		<link>http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/#comment-996</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[tim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:23:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipx86.com/blog/?p=234#comment-996</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nah, Vista isn&#039;t Windows ME.  People didn&#039;t upgrade to ME and then downgrade back to 98 -- they just hated it.

Vista is more like New Coke.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nah, Vista isn&#8217;t Windows ME.  People didn&#8217;t upgrade to ME and then downgrade back to 98 &#8212; they just hated it.</p>
<p>Vista is more like New Coke.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas Telford</title>
		<link>http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/#comment-995</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nicholas Telford]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2007 10:15:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipx86.com/blog/?p=234#comment-995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve been using Vista on my gaming machine almost since release now and I&#039;m using it as my primary OS on my laptop. That said, I still use and prefer Linux (GNOME) as my main desktop environment.

In terms of stability, Vista is leaps and bounds ahead of where XP was after release. 

Sure, it was unstable at first, due in most part to nVIDIA&#039;s graphics drivers, but those have now been fixed and perform reasonably well. With respect to bundled apps crashing, the only crashes I have encountered that weren&#039;t my own fault (i.e. accidentally opening a huge binary in notepad) have been with Windows Explorer. I get the feeling that it&#039;s thumbnailing is a little buggy. Still, I&#039;m fairly confident that this will be fixed in or before SP1.

The only thing that really irritates me about UAC is that it doesn&#039;t compile multiple dialogs for a single high-level operation in to one. Aside from that, the ridiculous regularity of UAC dialogs can be mostly attributed to 3rd party developers requiring Administrative access when they shouldn&#039;t (Battlefield 2142 needs it due to Punkbuster, this is not on). Once 3rd party developers start writing their programs so that they can operate in a reduced privileges environment (which they should have to start with) things will ease up.

I urge you, and anyone trying out Vista to compare it&#039;s security and stability to XP at its release, not XP now. If anything, Vista is the new XP - and look how well that did.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been using Vista on my gaming machine almost since release now and I&#8217;m using it as my primary OS on my laptop. That said, I still use and prefer Linux (GNOME) as my main desktop environment.</p>
<p>In terms of stability, Vista is leaps and bounds ahead of where XP was after release. </p>
<p>Sure, it was unstable at first, due in most part to nVIDIA&#8217;s graphics drivers, but those have now been fixed and perform reasonably well. With respect to bundled apps crashing, the only crashes I have encountered that weren&#8217;t my own fault (i.e. accidentally opening a huge binary in notepad) have been with Windows Explorer. I get the feeling that it&#8217;s thumbnailing is a little buggy. Still, I&#8217;m fairly confident that this will be fixed in or before SP1.</p>
<p>The only thing that really irritates me about UAC is that it doesn&#8217;t compile multiple dialogs for a single high-level operation in to one. Aside from that, the ridiculous regularity of UAC dialogs can be mostly attributed to 3rd party developers requiring Administrative access when they shouldn&#8217;t (Battlefield 2142 needs it due to Punkbuster, this is not on). Once 3rd party developers start writing their programs so that they can operate in a reduced privileges environment (which they should have to start with) things will ease up.</p>
<p>I urge you, and anyone trying out Vista to compare it&#8217;s security and stability to XP at its release, not XP now. If anything, Vista is the new XP &#8211; and look how well that did.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anders Aagaard</title>
		<link>http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/#comment-994</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anders Aagaard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2007 04:53:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipx86.com/blog/?p=234#comment-994</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the large problems with vista is also the &quot;vista compatible&quot; stamp that microsoft likes giving people permission to use.  After vista was released people found a LOT of hardware around that was marked as vista compatible, that either had drivers that worked poorly, or didn&#039;t work at all.

Now that might not be a problem if you have very standard hardware (although nvidia has had stability problems for long after vista&#039;s release), but it would be a big problem on non standard stuff you might find in say.. a shuttle box?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the large problems with vista is also the &#8220;vista compatible&#8221; stamp that microsoft likes giving people permission to use.  After vista was released people found a LOT of hardware around that was marked as vista compatible, that either had drivers that worked poorly, or didn&#8217;t work at all.</p>
<p>Now that might not be a problem if you have very standard hardware (although nvidia has had stability problems for long after vista&#8217;s release), but it would be a big problem on non standard stuff you might find in say.. a shuttle box?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthijs van der Vleuten</title>
		<link>http://blog.chipx86.com/2007/10/12/vista-windows-mes-successor/#comment-993</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthijs van der Vleuten]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:33:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipx86.com/blog/?p=234#comment-993</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve recently installed Vista on my iMac, having dual-booted XP before. So far, I haven&#039;t experienced any crashes in Vista. Besides UAC, the only annoyance I&#039;ve found is when starting games, Vista thinks the game is hanging when I click before the game has fully loaded.

Are those crashes reproducable? If not, I suggest testing your hardware. As I don&#039;t get random crashes while using Vista, either something&#039;s wrong with your hardware, or certain drivers or applications are acting up.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve recently installed Vista on my iMac, having dual-booted XP before. So far, I haven&#8217;t experienced any crashes in Vista. Besides UAC, the only annoyance I&#8217;ve found is when starting games, Vista thinks the game is hanging when I click before the game has fully loaded.</p>
<p>Are those crashes reproducable? If not, I suggest testing your hardware. As I don&#8217;t get random crashes while using Vista, either something&#8217;s wrong with your hardware, or certain drivers or applications are acting up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

