Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Windows for Supercomputers needs less memory than Vista

____/ Richard Rasker on Tuesday 20 November 2007 23:22 : \____

> nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> <Quote>
>> With its first public beta of Microsoft Windows HPC Server 2008,
>> released last week, Microsoft coincidentally highlighted one of the
>> reasons why Windows Vista adoption figures have remained near-non-
>> existent in the enterprise -- its expensive hardware requirements.
>> </Quote>
>> http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;2091560903;fp;2;fpid;1
> But, but, but, according to all those smart Windows apologists, Vista
> doesn't need 10-20 times the resources of a normal OS! They say Vista isn't
> the ultimately bloated, DRM-ridden, badly supported consumer con trick!
> They told me so a year ago! Do you mean all those four people lied? And do
> you call all of Microsoft's top brass and marketing department lying
> hypocrite bastards? (I know I do!)

Several hours ago, when I posted the following news from yesterday elsewhere:

        (Why I've replaced Vista with Linux)

People replied to say that it makes perfect sense based on their own
experiences. Vista is a resource pig (especially as far as RAM is concerned,
but it also requires the force of the CPU and the GPU... for just rendering

I admit that I never used Vista, but if you listen to what people say, then it
becomes apparent that a lot of Kool-aid has been served to the press.

                ~~ Best of wishes

For governments that eavesdrop, here is a quick list of tags: Communism,
Hawaiian shirts, China, Suitcase, Martha Stewart, Encryption, Prison, Stalin.
Thanks for tuning in.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index