Re: Vista
- From: Conor <conor_turton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 23:09:44 +0100
In article <1ixmd76.1sun0oyvra8g8N%steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, SteveH
says...
Conor <conor_turton@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Even not looking at the technical details then, Vista is considerably
In article <73mqtnFvt4khU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, JackH says...
XP was much better from day one than the heap of shit that is 'Win ME', theXP to Vista is nothing like 98SE to WinME. 98SE and WinME shared pretty
stepping stone between 98 and XP you have conveniently omitted to mention,
and I'd suggest that whilst not as unstable and flawed as ME, Vista is the
equivalent to that than a patched 98 in the great scheme of 'adopted by the
masses and why.
much everything. XP and Vista have completely different kernels, driver
models, network stacks etc etc etc. WinME was Win98SE with System
Restore bolted on.
Did you read what he posted?
If you did, you got a very different interpretation of it than I did.
He didn't look at technical details, more the way we'll look back at
vista when Win7 comes online.
different to XP.
--
Conor
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Vista
- From: SteveH
- Re: Vista
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Vista
- Next by Date: Re: Vista
- Previous by thread: Re: Vista
- Next by thread: Re: Vista
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|