“When I write a column, I almost never feel I have had enough time using the product under review. Even in the rare instance in which deadlines aren’t bearing down, I often realize later on that I’ve missed a fair amount. In the case of Microsoft’s Windows Vista, flaws that I thought would grow less annoying with extended use have actually become more troublesome,” Stephen H. Wildstrom reports for BusinessWeek.
“Most of the time I spent testing Vista was with sluggish pre-release versions. I expected things to improve when I ran the finished software on PCs configured for the new Windows version. I now realize that Vista really is slow unless you throw a lot of hardware at it. Microsoft claims it will run with 512 megabytes of memory. I had recommended a minimum of a gigabyte, but 2 GB is more like it if you want snappy performance. This is especially true if you’re also running resource-hungry Microsoft Office 2007,” Wildstrom reports.
Wildstrom reports, “The most exasperating thing about Vista, though, is the security feature called User Account Control. UAC, satirized in an Apple ad as a security guy who constantly interrupts a conversation, appears as a pop-up asking permission before Windows will do a number of things: change system settings, install programs, or update antivirus software. UAC may well be necessary to block malicious programs from secretly installing themselves or hijacking your browser settings. But Microsoft has designed it to drive you nuts.”
Wildstrom reports, “There’s a real danger here: UAC is such a nag that many folks will just turn it off, which Microsoft has made quite easy to do [and which] severely weakens Vista’s defenses.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Judge Bork” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take: Yet another very good Vista review. Very good for Apple, that is.
Apple “Get a Mac” ad – Security:
Related articles:
Analyst: Microsoft’s Windows Vista is very good for Apple Mac – March 13, 2007
Windows expert dumps Windows, switches to Apple’s Mac OS X, finds software plentiful – March 12, 2007
InfoWorld: 9,000 people switch to Apple Mac every day (plus testing ‘Embrace and Extinguish’) – February 28, 2007
Netscape founder Marc Andreessen switches to Apple Mac – February 28, 2007
Computerworld: Windows expert dumps Windows, switches to Apple’s Mac OS X – February 08, 2007
Embrace and Extinguish in action: TechIQ’s ‘The VAR Guy’ dumps Windows, switches to Mac OS X – September 25, 2006
Windows sufferer spends six hours trying to ‘upgrade’ to Vista, says: ‘I should’ve bought a Mac’ – February 07, 2007
Windows Vista woes push BBC News editor to regret never having ‘defected’ to Apple Mac – February 06, 2007
Bill Gates unhinged with Apple envy; Microsoft on path to become high profile casualty – February 06, 2007
Apple takes dead aim at Microsoft’s Windows Vista in latest ‘Get a Mac’ ad (with video) – February 06, 2007
Digit: Don’t buy Vista; Microsoft may be driving millions to stick with XP or move to Apple Mac – February 05, 2007
Bill Gates has lost his mind: calls Apple liars, copiers; slams Mac OS X security vs. Windows – February 02, 2007
TIME Magazine: Microsoft’s Windows Vista ‘an embarassment to the good name of American innovation’ – February 02, 2007
Microsoft’s Windows Vista: Five years for a chrome-plated turd – January 30, 2007
Those unfamiliar with Apple’s Mac OS X may be impressed with Windows Vista – January 29, 2007
Digit: ‘Microsoft’s Windows Vista may be the best reason yet to buy an Apple Mac’ – January 29, 2007
Pioneer Press: Windows Vista shows ‘Apple is an innovation engine; Microsoft, not so much’ – January 29, 2007
Windows Vista disappoints, so get a Mac – January 29, 2007
Microsoft emails reveal serious Mac OS X Tiger envy – January 26, 2007
Analyst: Microsoft’s Windows Vista could be an opportunity for Apple – January 26, 2007
CNET Reviews Windows Vista: Is that all? Clunky and not very intuitive vs. Mac OS X; warmed-over XP – January 24, 2007
Mossberg: Microsoft’s Windows Vista offers lesser imitations of Apple’s Mac OS X features – January 18, 2007
Windows Vista disappointment drives longtime ‘Microsoft apologist’ to Apple’s Mac OS X – January 17, 2007
InformationWeek Review: Apple’s Mac OS X shines in comparison with Microsoft’s Windows Vista – January 06, 2007
NY Times’ Pogue reviews Microsoft’s Windows Vista: ‘Looks, Locks, Lacks’ – December 14, 2006
Unlike Microsoft’s Windows Vista, Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard will create no new jobs – December 12, 2006
A Windows expert opts for a Mac life, finds the experience ‘superb’ – December 07, 2006
15-year Windows vet tries Apple Mac: ‘My God! This is amazing!’ – December 04, 2006
Dave Winer: ‘Microsoft isn’t an innovator, and never was – they are always playing catch-up’ – December 01, 2006
Harvard Medical School CIO picks Mac OS X over Linux and Windows – November 30, 2006
A Windows expert opts for a Mac life – November 06, 2006
Apple Macs can run more software than Windows PCs – October 30, 2006
Microsoft’s Windows Vista is basically Microsoft’s version of Mac OS 9.3 – October 11, 2006
Embrace and Extinguish in action: TechIQ’s ‘The VAR Guy’ dumps Windows, switches to Mac OS X – September 25, 2006
Top Windows developer dumps Microsoft’s ‘pile of crap’ for Apple’s Mac OS X – September 12, 2006
$399 for Windows Vista Ultimate?! (Hint: Get a Mac) – August 29, 2006
Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard is 64-bit done right, unlike Microsoft’s Windows Vista kludge – August 14, 2006
Microsoft Windows Vista: If you can’t innovate… try to impersonate Apple’s Mac OS X – August 10, 2006
Analyst: Apple’s new Mac OS X Leopard sets new bar, leaves Microsoft’s Vista in the dust – August 08, 2006
Microsoft botches another copy job: Windows Vista Flip3D vs. Apple Mac OS X Exposé – June 26, 2006
Windows Vista rips-off Mac OS X at great hardware cost (and Apple gains in the end) – June 13, 2006
Computerworld: Microsoft Windows Vista a distant second-best to Apple Mac OS X – June 02, 2006
Dude, you got a Dell? What are you, stupid? Only Apple Macs run both Mac OS X and Windows! – April 05, 2006
Defending Windows over Mac a sign of mental illness – December 20, 2003
“Just keep in mind that the older of the activist idiots who flog “global warming” were the same ones who killed off the building of new nuclear power plants in their insane assault on the science and technology of which they are utterly ignorant. They scream their insults at everyone, even though they are the ones who blocked an energy source that would have radically cut carbon dioxide and other emissions.
What a bunch of hypocrites!”
Your statement above is not what I would consider to be a safe alternative. If we build nuclear plants everywhere, what do we do with all that nuclear waste?
As you know, the nuclear waste takes millions of years to break down…there is no containers that outlive the nuclear waste its holding. So eventually it leaks into the environment.
Also thermal heat released into the environment causes thermal pollution when its released into nearby streams killing the fish and the ecosytems there.
I hear they are trying to figure out how to clean up some nuclear waste that is leaking into underground water channels.
Not a safe solution.
Shinobi
Next time you’re out in the wilderness camping beware of those feral cows.
They may be slow but they are dangerous.
Moo.
Here are a few examples – pick one, then focus your outrage… or can they all be true?
Greenpeace – six football fields a minute
The Nature Conservancy – 86,400 football fields of rainforest per day
CFACT – one football field a minute
Try a little light reading, Shinobi, and don’t be so quick to dismiss different views. It’s gonna be a nice, warm day…
Remember, Al Gore’s movie was based on a consensus of scientists. Science is not consensus–it’s either fact, or not science.
in the 1970’s scientists were scared of ‘global cooling’ that just shows you how well humans understand how this planet works.
oops – I messed up that CFACT link –
just google “rainforest football fields” and open the first twenty or so articles in tabs. You’ll get the idea. If your organization has to lie to make headlines, then… ah, hell. you finish the rest.
I’ll tell you what worries me
Global Smarming
It’s everywhere.
Especially in election years…
MW:ill
Plain and simple uac on vista is a joke. I’ve been using vista for the past month and it was the first thing I turned off as well as the insescent notification windows that keep popping up to tell you that your computer is not protected. After that the os actually runs fairly smooth. In all honesty you do not need this feature in vista and I think microsoft wasted its time on this which could of been spent improving other features of the os, this is why osx is a much better operating system. As far as security goes from my experience run a firewall a decent antivirus program and don’t use explorer use firefox instead less spyware affects firefox. Most importantly use common sense don’t open files if you don’t know what they are or who they came from and be mindfull of the websites you browse to.
rob –
Give it another 30 years – it’ll be back around again
I think the U.N should buy the rain forest.
That way, they can clear cut 5 square miles and build new headquartes.
Just a thought.
First, how can anyone be surprised that Visata sucks, considering the massive compromises that were made just to get it out the door two years late.
More important, however, is the depressing lack of any scientific education being displayed here in the global warming discussion. It is clear that everything bad that has ever been said about the American educational system is completely true. Putting facts aside, there’s no evidence of even understanding the scientific method. I will assume that most of the people posting here also are convinced that there is no such thing as evolution. I fear that we are doomed and will face the collapse of civilizatoin in short order.
I am really embarassed to admit to being a republican, as nowadays that moniker should really be associated with ignorant religious fanatics who are no better than the Islamists they are so ready to bomb.
If only the Democrats weren’t in the pockets of the unions and trail lawyers and not so determined to raise my taxes.
I’m having a hard time deciding which one is a least-worst pick.
pessimist –
oooooh, tell us more about this ‘scientific method’! is that how you identify ‘ignorant religious fanatics’?
@Pessimist
You talk about a depressing lack of scientific education in the same breath which you ‘assume’ that the people in this thread do not believe in evolution.
Hear that flushing sound? Your credibility just wen down the porcelain bowl.
@Ron…science is hypothesis driven. You compile facts to support this hypothesis. However, facts can be proven wrong over time so don’t bet too hard on the validity of a fact. If you look at the old studies on spontaneous generation, the Itallians had plenty of facts supporting that microbial life did spontaneously generate.
Scientists for the most part, all agree on glonbal warming. That is a fact. Its how it is occuring and its rate of change is up for questioning. That is also a fact.
Personally I still think it is caused by Steve Ballmer…I just cannot prove it yet.
I guess I’m missing your point….I am not disputing the descrapancies in the numbers regarding the amount of rain forest disappearing per day or minute…
The fact is, most of it is gone. Are you saying its not?
Shinobi,
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
that is shinola.
just buy a plane and fly over it.
that will settle this once and for all.
This world is full of polorized sheep that believe whatever “their” party tells them. What a crock.
1. Consensus does not *PROVE* anything, and has *NOTHING* to do with *SCIENCE*. Without *PROOF* there can be no *FACT*. This “Man is causing global warming” craze is nothing more than drummed up sensationalism fuel by the media (Which loves a good crisis) and the scientists seeking funding, as well as the government control advocates. Remeber the coming ICE AGE crisis. That was the “consensus” in the 70’s.. Hell, there isn’t even a consensus, despite the alarmists claims, read the definition below, there is no harmony, no unamity. There are plenty of qualified scientist who discreted this nonsense.
consensus noun 1 there was consensus among delegates agreement, harmony, concurrence, accord, unity, unanimity, solidarity; formal concord. antonym disagreement. 2 the consensus was that they should act general opinion, majority opinion, common view.
2. Yes our planet *MAY* have warmed 1/2 degree. Big friggin deal, get over yourself arrogant humans. It has risen and fallen much more over the course of it’s history. Of which we are but a speck in time. We have *MAYBE* 100 years of accurate measurements, and at best a couple hundred years of records. Explain the *FACT* that mars is currently “Warming” at the same rate. We also happen to be in a period of increased solor activity and storms, but I am sure that means nothing compared to the damage the hummers and yukons are doing to the planet.
3. 85 % of the rain forest hasn’t been cut down either, that is just plain FUD.
4. “Remember Egypt at one time was a lush and fertile land, now it’s a desert.” and WTF does that prove exactly? The earth was once covered in ice and snow too, the continents used to be shaped differently too. OMG…
5. “But only since the end of WWII has the temperatures and CO2 levels risen higher than ever before in Earths history.” More BS FUD, check your facts, no wait forget it, thats how the global warming crowd works, bad facts, bad science, and alarmist FUD….
MDN word: Freedom – As in the freedom to think and question bad science…
You said that 85% of the rain forest has not been cut down.
Please cite a credible reference that says that.
You said that 85% of the rain forest has not been cut down.
Please cite a credible reference that says that.
You said that 85% of the rain forest has not been cut down.
Please cite a credible reference that says that.
“just buy a plane and fly over it.
that will settle this once and for all”
I just flew over South America!
But actually, I cheaped out and used Google Earth instead of burning jet fuel.
TMF=
Tell me when you Google over Texas-I will wave….
or cover my head, one.
Sure! It is a long read, but I am sure than someone so concerned with the “crisis” would want as much data as possible..
http://www.cfact.org/site/view_article.asp?idCategory=5&idarticle=214
MDN word: Wish – I wish we didn’t accept falsely generated crisis without PROOF…
http://www.cfact.org/site/view_article.asp?idCategory=10&idarticle=1115
Some interesting stuff here too, filled with *LOGIC* and *FACT*
Here is a sample:
CSR must recognize how misguided energy policies will affect the world’s poor
Every snowstorm, hurricane, deluge or drought generates headlines, horror movies and television specials, demanding action to avoid imminent climate catastrophe. Skeptics are pilloried, labeled “climate criminals,” and threatened with “Nuremberg-style war crimes trials.”
Britain’s Royal Society has demanded that ExxonMobil stop funding researchers who say global warming is primarily the result of natural forces. Meanwhile, scientist James Hansen received $250,000 from Teresa Heinz-Kerry for insisting that warming is due to humans, and “socially responsible” investor services refuse to list or recommend corporations they deem insufficiently sensitive on the subject.
Not surprisingly, companies from Wal-Mart to BP, GE and JP Morgan have brought climate activists into their board rooms, lobbied Congress for climate and ethanol legislation, and retooled to produce new product lines intended to boost tax subsidies, favorable PR and profits.
But are these actions socially responsible or in the best interests of society as a whole?
Asserting “the science is settled” ignores the debate that still rages. Proclaiming that “climate change is real” ignores Earth’s constant, natural warming and cooling.
Vikings raised crops and cattle in Greenland 1000 years ago, while Britons grew grapes in England. Four hundred years later, the Vikings were frozen out, Europe was gripped in a Little Ice Age, and priests performed exorcisms on advancing Swiss glaciers. The globe warmed in 1850-1940, cooled for the next 35 years, then warmed slightly again.
Detroit experienced six snowstorms in April 1868, frosts in August 1869, a 98-degree heat wave in June 1874, and ice-free lakes in January 1877. Wisconsin’s record high of 114 degrees F in July 1936 was followed five years later by a record July low of 46. In 1980, five years after Newsweek’s “new little ice age” cover story, Washington, DC endured 67 days above 90 degrees.
Studies by National Academy of Sciences, NOAA, Danish and other scientists continue to raise inconvenient truths that question and contradict catastrophic climate change theories, computer models and assertions. The “hockey stick” temperature graph (which claimed 1990-2000 was the hottest decade in 1000 years) was shown to be invalid; the Southern Hemisphere has not warmed in the past 25 years; the US is yet to be hit by a major hurricane in 2006; interior Greenland and Antarctica are gaining ice mass, not losing it; and Gulf Stream circulation has not slowed, as claimed in 2005.
Other recent studies conclude the sun’s radiant heat and cosmic ray levels affect planetary warming and cloud formation more strongly than acknowledged by climate alarmists. That’s logical. Why would natural forces that caused climate change and bizarre weather in past centuries suddenly stop working?
Gee we don’t get coverage of this side of the debate from the media now do we….
YOU WANT PROOF? THEY CAN’T HANDLE THE PROOF!
wait, that didn’t sound right.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/osu-atd021207.php
http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257909
MW:hard, as in evidence…
from: http://www.cfact.org/site/view_article.asp?idCategory=4&idarticle=1190
We’re doomed. What’s for dinner?
Latest U.N. report on climate change produces same old, same old
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
by Alan Caruba
On Sunday, Jan 28, the front-page story in my daily newspaper was “A chilling conclusion on global warming.” By Tuesday, the front page story was “Climate Study: Millions will go hungry and dry.” Soon more revelations about a United Nations report on climate change, due in April, will be in the news, but let me tell you its conclusion. We’re doomed.
Now, you might ask yourself, why should we have any confidence in a report from an international institution that perpetrated the “Oil-for-Food” scandal? Or that stacked its Human Rights Commission with representatives of the most repressive nations? Or that initiated a ban on DDT, thus leading to the needless deaths of millions from malaria? Or that is currently dawdling around while thousands continue to die in Darfur?
I mean, just how much credibility does the United Nations have these days? Or, for that matter, its International Panel on Climate Change that has issued various assessments of the climate since it was created in 1988 under the aegis of the U.N. Environmental Program?
Despite the Oscar statuette waiting for Al Gore’s dubious documentary, should we really take the word of Hollywood celebrities, politicians, and a U.N. panel that, according to the Sunday news story, involves a “group of 50 researchers, representing thousands more, (who) will then meet in secret to put the finishing touches on the report.”
“Meet in secret”? Excuse me, but isn’t real science about being able to actually prove one’s conclusions are accurate, as opposed to promoting a scarifying report that predicts that, by 2080, millions of people will go hungry and that there will be “critical water shortages in China and Australia, as well as parts of Europe and the United States?”
When he accepted the prestigious 2006 Craaford Prize, Wallace S. Broecker, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and universally deemed the world’s foremost climate interpreter, said, “My lifetime study of Earth’s climate system has humbled me. I’m convinced that we have greatly underestimated the complexity of this system. The importance of obscure phenomena, ranging from those that control the size of raindrops to those that control the amount of water pouring into the deep sea from the shelves of the Antarctic continent, makes reliable modeling very difficult, if not impossible.”
Despite the endless deluge of global warming claims there is also a mountain of climate data to dispute them. The primary reason for disputing the claims is that they are based on computer models. These are similar computer models meteorologists use to predict next week’s weather. How often are these predictions wrong? The answer is (a) daily, (b) weekly, (c) frequently or (d) all of the above.
Coming soon, there will be another huge media barrage about global warming. Let me put your mind at ease. It is common knowledge among meteorologists that the Earth has natural cycles of warming and cooling. Has the Earth been warming? Yes, since the end of the last Ice Age according to most experts. Is it rapidly warming now? No – at least not outside the range of natural variability.
If you want to believe a bunch of guys meeting in secret to write horrible scenarios of stuff that is not going to happen, be my guest.
What really scares me, however, is proposed federal legislation based on the latest U.N. report. The damage it will do to our thriving economy is incalculable.
Caruba, an adjunct CFACT policy analyst, writes a weekly column, “Warning Signs,” posted on the website of The National Anxiety Center at http://www.anxietycenter.com.
Now I will readily admit