keropi wrote:
vista is gonna set new standards, either you like it or not, like xp did, and 95/98 did before.
The only new standards Vista sets are those of the sheer amount of hardware required to run it...
After all, Vista is basically XP with extra eye candy, which was basically Windows 2000 with extra eye candy, which itself was basically Windows NT with plug 'n' play and USB support.
Windows 95 set new standards - it had to really, to replace the extremely dire Windows 3.x series. 98 and the useless Me were just evolutions of the 95 base.
And NT set new standards as it was a 32-bit version of Windows built from the ground up. Subsequent releases of Windows as we now know it are still just evolutionary changes to Windows NT.
like when 95 came, all pc users ditched old ISA cards and moved to PCI... so what? evolution.
This change wasn't specifically because of Windows 95 though... Granted, Win95 made it easier to use such cards, but PCI existed before Win95, and ISA cards continued to be used well after its release.
if you make a funny remark about windows being crap or {bleep}ty, well then, you either don't want to see facts as they are
What you mean here is that
you don't want other people to see things from a different point of view...
Honestly, other than a load of eye candy and a few extra bundled applications, what does Vista give people that they can't already do using Windows 2000 and/or XP?
- Ali
