maroon1
New Member
You can see the worst 10 tech for 2007 from here
http://www.bootdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=972&Itemid=51
http://www.bootdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=972&Itemid=51
Worst tech of 2007
- Thread starter maroon1
- Start date
1. Windows Vista:
Without a doubt, the biggest bummer of 2007 is Windows Vista. Built on a delayed schedule and severely over-hyped by Microsoft, this ultra-expensive Operating System started out with extremely lofty goals only to have the vast majority of them curbed, in order to get it out sooner, rather than later.
Heheh, I knew it!
2. DirectX 10:
Perhaps because it's tied in with the two-toed sloth Microsoft Calls Windows Vista; I'm not sure. But one thing I know is I have yet to be impressed by any DirectX 10 game. It brings nothing but a few worthless, barely noticeable, graphical features that turn out to be nothing more than a complete performance drain. In every game we've tested so far, the performance dip was so huge that there's no way in God's green Earth DX10 is ready for primetime.
DOH!
Without a doubt, the biggest bummer of 2007 is Windows Vista. Built on a delayed schedule and severely over-hyped by Microsoft, this ultra-expensive Operating System started out with extremely lofty goals only to have the vast majority of them curbed, in order to get it out sooner, rather than later.
Heheh, I knew it!
2. DirectX 10:
DOH!
Motoxrdude
Active Member
Wow, there where much worse things then the iPhone, crisis, and ddr3...
True, but where the other things hyped as much as the things he listed? I think he listed the worst 10 most hyped tech products.
Motoxrdude
Active Member
True.
Thanks for that was a fun read and now I know what website to NOT get reviews from
I think they looked accurate to me.
INTELCRAZY
banned
Thanks for that was a fun read and now I know what website to NOT get reviews from
Believe 'dat! Not just because of Vista or DX10's article.. Just because that writer could be blind...
iPhone is pretty much....crap. It's so innovative(sarcasm)... Yet I can find an LG that does the same thing on 4 different carriers for a cheaper price... Innovation in the deepest and darkest of places...
diduknowthat
formerly liuliuboy
I don't see how vista is the worst product of 2007. He seems to make 2GB of ram sound astronomical when you can buy 2gb of DDR2 800 ram for $40.
And also Crysis isn't exactly that bad. Although I didn't like the cliff hanger ending, the game was pretty well made and includes many usable vehicles.
And also Crysis isn't exactly that bad. Although I didn't like the cliff hanger ending, the game was pretty well made and includes many usable vehicles.
Motoxrdude
Active Member
Eh, there was a lot of things promised in vista that never came through. Like getting rid of registries, a secure kernel, etc.
Gareth
Active Member
People who write reviews have to realise its not 2004, 2GB is in budget PCs now, 3GB is becoming the new standard, everyone makes it sound like it should run on 64mb of RAM like they tried to do with XP. What Vista does is use the RAM efficiently to make it faster than XP by using unused RAM as paging file... So ive been told. I think stuff like MAC OSX Leopard would have been better at Number 1.... it is basically the same UI as their first one, also, it requires more resources to run over Vista....
I am very anti-MAC
.
I am very anti-MAC
.
Last edited:
Motoxrdude
Active Member
For one, it is the same GUI, as with all windows (from 95 till now), just now vista has an accelerated layer on top of the xserver (don't know the windows term for it). And no, it does not use more resources then vista. I am running it on a GIII, 128mb ram just fine.People who write reviews have to realise its not 2004, 2GB is in budget PCs now, 3GB is becoming the new standard, everyone makes it sound like it should run on 64mb of RAM like they tried to do with XP. What Vista does is use the RAM efficiently to make it faster than XP by using unused RAM as paging file... So ive been told. I think stuff like MAC OSX Leopard would have been better at Number 1.... it is basically the same UI as their first one, also, it requires more resources to run over Vista....
I am very anti-MAC
Only thing worse then bashing an OS is doing so with lies.
Interested
New Member
INTELCRAZY
banned
People who write reviews have to realise its not 2004, 2GB is in budget PCs now, 3GB is becoming the new standard, everyone makes it sound like it should run on 64mb of RAM like they tried to do with XP. What Vista does is use the RAM efficiently to make it faster than XP by using unused RAM as paging file... So ive been told. I think stuff like MAC OSX Leopard would have been better at Number 1.... it is basically the same UI as their first one, also, it requires more resources to run over Vista....
I am very anti-MAC
That's about as useless as a DVD-Rewinder... Mac is a good stable OS, never had a problem out of it. You do Windows stuff on Windows, you do Linux stuff on Linux, and guess what? You do Mac stuff on Mac.. They all have their specialties.. I have my rants about Linux, who doesn't about anything? Everything has their pros and cons... I hope you don't plan for a career in technology, medicine, or engineering, that "anti-Mac" will kill it... And MAC stands for Media Access Control not Macintosh...
As said before... I thought he was blind...
I think with the Vista hatred, ppl are too lazy to get off the nest and change some hardware... Maybe it's just me though, Vista 'came' to me easy enough.
This is for brian/brianmay27, at least you have tried Mac... And you own a piece of Apple hardware, impressive honesty...
Last edited:
Kesava
Active Member
Motoxrdude
Active Member
INTELCRAZY
banned
I can understand that..
As far as changing hardware goes in favor of Vista-- a person can understand it... But, ppl cannot understand it.. Do you see where I am going with this?
