I don't understand, XP was just fine, I know this is late but now they're coming out with Windows 7 here soon and I was told Windows 7 is more like XP than it is Vista. I don't understand why they made Vista to replace XP and now Windows 7 to replace Vista. Why was Vista made?
If a thread like this has been made then sorry, I wasn't here for it.
and windows 8!
[editline]01:54PM[/editline]
whats the difference¿!
It was made because XP was becoming outdated, it's been 8 years since XP was released. There were still many security issues, and they could have spent a very long time trying to make a really old OS secure (if they planned on doing this, we would probably still have windows 98, just with a bunch of security updates), or they could have (which they did) make a new, more secure OS. Microsoft usually ships a new OS out once every 3 years. For some reason, they let XP run for 5 years. So people got a little more attached to XP than other OS's. When Windows 8 is released, people will be asking "Why was windows 7 made?"
tl;dr - regular OS turnover is 3 years, XP had an extra 2, Vista was actually delayed. It's just the way OS's progress. Why was XP made if Vista came after it but we still had Windows NT?
tl;dr tl;dr - Because that's the way OS's work, you don't wait a decade to release a new OS, you wait 3 years.
It has tons of new features and is actually a pretty good OS. The people complaining about it need to stop complaining and start using it.
Vista was made to add major updates and make money. Not to mention corporate businesses would like to think MS was still alive.
Windows 7 isn't like XP atall imo... Yes it's faster and more efficient but it's Vista with a minor makeover and everything (almost) fixed =] :eng101:
Because since 2001 Apple have picked up their game again.
see facepunch can help :science:
[QUOTE=n00bmuffin;16714823]It has tons of new features and is actually a pretty good OS. The people complaining about it need to stop complaining and start using it.[/QUOTE]
I had Vista but moved to XP because I find it better.
But there is opinion behind it. But Vista [I]does[/I] chew up quite a bit more CPU power than XP does.
I preferred Vista to XP.
They needed quick money to finish up Windows 7 is the truth.
I love you all.
Vista looks sexy.
XP looks like plastic.
:downs:
[QUOTE=VladimirPutin;16715206]Vista looks sexy.
XP looks like plastic.
:downs:[/QUOTE]
But it does :buddy:
Firstly, [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=607677[/url]
[quote=title]No Vista is good/shit/at all.[/quote]
Secondly, this is like asking why there's more than one OS. Why have 7 if we had vista? why have vista if we have XP? why have XP when... etc
This is the most retarded question I've seen for a while now, it's common fucking sense. Why is there more than one version of anything? If McDonalds is already making money, why add new items to the menu? If Cadbury is selling Dairly Milk, why sell any other products? If we have one car, why make another one?
fixes. updates. money. plenty of reasons if you can pull your cock out of your own mouth to look up and see the bandwagon consists entirely of retards with nothing better to do and mongoloids looking to rage at anything for the sake of raging
Doughnutsalad, you are the dumbest user I have seen this year, you seem to enjoy making shit threads and having a bandwagon opinion. Vista was needed to allow he PC industry to evolve, by making a new standard. And to fix the major shit that XP may have had wrong. XP was beccomng dated as hell, it's nice to see a change, but Vista a bit more of a change than the previous versions of Windows. If you still have a unfounded hate for Vista, then you need to grow up.
also 7 isn't replacing Vista in the same way Vista didn't replace XP, it's the next generation of an OS. Grow some fucking sense.
[QUOTE=reapaninja;16716408]also 7 isn't replacing Vista in the same way Vista didn't replace XP, it's the next generation of an OS. Grow some fucking sense.[/QUOTE]
Grow.. sense? :buddy:
well it's not like you mine it
why replace 2000? it's better than Xp. why should we ever make new software?
[QUOTE=Foda;16716899]why replace 2000? it's better than Xp. why should we ever make new software?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I'm rollin' back to windows 95.
Bitches.
fucking 3.1 bitches!
The same reason that Windows ME was needed after 98. Microsoft wanted to release the same product with a few changes here and there to make people bitch less and give them money again. And just like ME (and really, any release since win2K), Microsoft failed to deliver a product worth paying for.
[QUOTE=Cathbadh;16717578]The same reason that Windows ME was needed after 98. Microsoft wanted to release the same product with a few changes here and there to make people bitch less and give them money again. And just like ME (and really, any release since win2K), Microsoft failed to deliver a product worth paying for.[/QUOTE]
Which is why I didn't pay for it.
Inb4 warez, it's an msdn copy.
Windows XP was way too old. The first release was in 2009. So it's like 8 years old. 8 years...
Apple released OS after OS, so they needed to catch up also.
They needed something new to keep the consumers happy, so they made Vista. Altough vista issnt THAT bad, it still sucks ass. Now Windows 7 is developped, it's based on vista, but then a major improvement.
Vista was like a WIP of 7 :')
Where were you in the 90s? They had new releases of Windows all the time, and now people complain if a release comes out sooner than 10 years from the last.
[QUOTE=Drumdevil;16718297]They needed something new to keep the consumers happy, so they made Vista.)[/QUOTE]
Kinda ironic considering most users rejected it.
It forced them to come up with Windows 7 though, so it's probably a good thing that Vista was pretty bad.
[QUOTE=gparent;16718380]Kinda ironic considering most users rejected it.
It forced them to come up with Windows 7 though, so it's probably a good thing that Vista was pretty bad.[/QUOTE]
Yeah good thing for them. They knew it sucked. But they announced Windows 7 around the time that consumers would find out vista sucked. That creates the illusion of microsoft listening to consumers.
Vista is just a WIP of windows 7 IMO
Vista wasn't bad
it might've been worse in the beginning, but that was because it was new and buggy
it got a bad reputation from macfags mouthing off and from moms with pentium 3s expecting it to run on their outdated systems, and still retains that reputation today
after SP1 Vista was fine
and they would have made a new OS anyway, it's not anything to do with Vista, it's like saying "[car company] brought out [car] because [previous car] was shit"
[QUOTE=reapaninja;16718675]Vista wasn't bad
it might've been worse in the beginning, but that was because it was new and buggy
it got a bad reputation from macfags mouthing off and from moms with pentium 3s expecting it to run on their outdated systems, and still retains that reputation today
after SP1 Vista was fine
and they would have made a new OS anyway, it's not anything to do with Vista, it's like saying "[car company] brought out [car] because [previous car] was shit"[/QUOTE]
You accused someone of giving out incorrect information in another topic. Now you are doing the same.
Vista doesnt meet up with todays standards. Let alone when it was first released. It made good rigs perform sloppy.
Windows XP exceeded the standards in 2001. Vista is a major dissappointment.
Macfags? :') The fact that vista sucks has nothing to do with what the "macfags" think.
[QUOTE=Drumdevil;16719423]You accused someone of giving out incorrect information in another topic. Now you are doing the same.
Vista doesnt meet up with todays standards. Let alone when it was first released. [B]It made good rigs perform sloppy.[/B]
Windows XP exceeded the standards in 2001. Vista is a major dissappointment.
Macfags? :') The fact that vista sucks has nothing to do with what the "macfags" think.[/QUOTE]
Do you realize how dumb you are? Pentium 4's with 512MB RAM is [B]NOT[/B] a good rig,
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.