Nairaland Forum

Trac:

Those front-ends will not decode bluray for playback. According to Microsoft, the architecture was redone to support the use of bluray in SP2 of Vista. Natively, it will burn bluray disc. For playback, it is to the manufacturer of the bluray hardware. The playback of bluray is not native to the OS itself but dependent on the hardware, firmware and a decoder that is totally dependent on the drive itself. In otherwords, the playback is upon the burden of the manufacturer that designs the drive.

If you think Windows 2000 was not as successful as Windows XP, then that explains your a lot about you. Windows 7 is Vista. The kernel is the same and the true name is Windows Server 2008 Release 2 (Windows 7 Server). The marketing name is Windows 7. Vista failed for the most percentile and it wasn't a good marketing strategy to still push on with the OS for the remaining of its lifecycle under the term Vista. If you have ever used any Windows Server, the tremendous stability leaves nothing to be desired. Windows 2008 was just streamed down and ported over for consumer-general use. Windows 7 is not faster than Vista. From what I can conclude, the animations are less than Vista. Hardcore gamers and those of like-entertainment will take Vista over Windows 7. Personally, my best operating system is Windows 2000, then Windows 2003.

Why don't you try Windows 8 before you make certain conclusions. I will understand if you do not like it. I detested it initially but took time to understand the metro thing and how to get rid of it. My old engineering tools run very well on W8 and that's all that matters to me. Some ran partly on W7. As far as I am aware of (with my limited usage), it is stable and I have some of the perks I get from Lion and there are no lock-ups or freezing. What I don't like about it is that it is "geared" for cloud computing and social networking. I see it as a big tool for information harvesting (my opinion).

Truly, there isn't much difference between the two (from a fundamental point of view). Layouts are different but behind the "screen" a lot has been done. It is a huge improvement to the Windows that is traditionally known.

LOL,

My analyst, you just love to argue.

How can Vista be faster than 7.LOL

Just shows you are not a heavy user.

Even hardcore games don't run well on Vista due to compatibility issue.

98 and XP are the must successful Windows OS till date.

Even Windows Vista and Windows 7 couldn't kill Window XP.

I have 8 on my petition and i tell you it will never be like Windows 7.

Go on tech blogs and forums. Do your research well.

emmatok:

LOL,

My analyst, you just love to argue.

How can Vista be faster than 7.LOL

Just shows you are not a heavy user.

Even hardcore games don't run well on Vista due to compatibility issue.

98 and XP are the must successful Windows OS till date.

Even Windows Vista and Windows 7 couldn't kill Window XP.

I have 8 on my petition and i tell you it will never be like Windows 7.

Go on tech blogs and forums. Do your research well.

Did I say Vista was faster than W7? I did not. You concluded on what I did not say, thus your epistle. They run at the same speed with one having better resource management. I still use XP till W8 will be released. I never said XP was inferior to Vista/7. I made that statement in another thread. I don't have to go on blogs and forums when I can analyse the core myself, comprehend released technical papers and see through the smokescreens. Hardcore games will run well if you have the right hardware for Vista. This is one area that I am certain MS got right in Vista, that is directX technology.

These things don't make a person better. They are designed to aid life and not improve them. Windows for me is for work and research/design and W8 fulfills that for me without the compatibility issues I am facing in W7. This isn't something we earn but buy; hence its worth. I don't waste my time tinkering with computers or keeping up with operating systems.

I totally disagree with you on Windows 98 being one of the most successful as oppose to Windows 2000. Win 98 is a complete joke to Win 2000. Besides it being primitive compared to 2000, it is not as stable.