Vista SP1

[Cliphead]

Anybody bothered?

[scooby]

will stop my alledged time hack from working?

[Cliphead]

will stop my alledged time hack from working?

Along with everything else Allegedly.

[AtW]

I would not use Vista even if it was free. Which it is to me thanks to Action Pack, but I ain't using it.

DOS 4.0 -> Windows ME -> Vista : a chain of crap interation of key products by Microsoft.

[Cliphead]

I would not use Vista even if it was free. Which it is to me thanks to Action Pack, but I ain't using it.

DOS 4.0 -> Windows ME -> Vista : a chain of crap interation of key products by Microsoft.

Agreed. I set up a test PC with Vista Ultimate more or less out of curiosity. So far critical applications that I need simply don't work, I've downloaded SP1 but can't be arsed installing it yet, maybe tomorrow.

No point in slagging something off without getting first hand experience.

[AtW]

No point in slagging something off without getting first hand experience.

I used Longhorn beta that was turned into RC. It was actually not bad, but it had issue with NTFS formatted disk that was seen just fine by XPs, this alone put it me big time. Why the ***k would a Windows XP NTFS formatted disk would work fine in other XP machines but not be visible in Longhorn? I had to do some moves that made me edgy in order to make it visible in there.

And that in Longhorn without all the bloat of Vista, DRM crap etc - why the heck would I want to upgrade my dev PC with slower OS that gives me absolutely nothing new? Direct X 10 was the only thing that was theoretically very tempting, however they royally screwed that up too.

I plan to use XP for the next 2-3 years.

[Cliphead]

I plan to use XP for the next 2-3 years.

I won't ever move to Vista on a production / development PC. So far Linux is doing about 90% of what I need with the last 10% coming soon. I'll keep an XP PC around for nostalgia but the full move away from MS is almost there.

[AtW]

I won't ever move to Vista on a production / development PC.

I would not use Microsoft "server" OS at all - it's just too expensive. I use Windows XP Pro 64-bit, which happens to be effectively a cut down build of Windows Server 2003, but the price is very cheap: I'd say Windows XP on my dev box is worth the money because of all backwards compatibility, but if I use server for fairly new apps I don't need all that so server markup is suddenly very expensive, if anything server versions should have been cheaper than desktop builds.

[Cliphead]

I would not use Microsoft "server" OS at all - it's just too expensive. I use Windows XP Pro 64-bit, which happens to be effectively a cut down build of Windows Server 2003, but the price is very cheap: I'd say Windows XP on my dev box is worth the money because of all backwards compatibility, but if I use server for fairly new apps I don't need all that so server markup is suddenly very expensive, if anything server versions should have been cheaper than desktop builds.

The numerous servers I have at home and maintain elsewhere are exclusively Linux (RH, CentOS), very cost effective & stable. SKA on Linux?

[AtW]

SKA on Linux?

SKA client does work on it thanks to Mono, but I would not run production .NET server on it - memory management in .NET is much better than in Mono right now, this was worked around in the client, but hard to deal with in server, so it's cheaper to run on "desktop" Windows version: Action Pack allows up to 10 of those, so that's maybe £20 per year, that's not a lot and I don't have to deal with the weirdness of Linux.

I had Linux router on a PC, but after one powercut it won't boot - just says Kernel Panic and that's it - very helpful, NOT!