Vista Compatibility ?
.NET v1.1 is installed to a totally different folder on your system so it doesn't effect anything else. Its a good idea to install .NET v1.1 on Vista, hundreds of programs use it.
Vista is designed for the new generation of graphics cards and cpu's.. We used to upgrade computers every year, now you're complaining when you have to upgrade every 3yrs
time for a faster computer and decent graphics card to take advantage of ALL the new awesome features of Vista!!
Vista is designed for the new generation of graphics cards and cpu's.. We used to upgrade computers every year, now you're complaining when you have to upgrade every 3yrs
time for a faster computer and decent graphics card to take advantage of ALL the new awesome features of Vista!!
Windows is its size because of you the consumer...backwards compatibilty is a good chunk of that size increase. There are also several other reasons why it is that size...and many of them just have to do with the fact that the OS has to run on an infinite matrix of hardware which several other OSes out there don't have to.
As far as security, I'd warrant the average PC user can't really tell which OS is more secure than another...they can definitely tell which one gets attacked more than another...but thats another story
.
Last edited by codgi; Mar 9, 2007 at 09:47 PM.
Sorry we're not Apple...we can't get up a morning and suddenly decide to move over to a BSD base and then throw backwards compatibility out the window. It would be great if we could though...the hours of testing we could save 
Windows is its size because of you the consumer...backwards compatibilty is a good chunk of that size increase. There are also several other reasons why it is that size...and many of them just have to do with the fact that the OS has to run on an infinite matrix of hardware which several other OSes out there don't have to.
As far as security, I'd warrant the average PC user can't really tell which OS is more secure than another...they can definitely tell which one gets attacked more than another...but thats another story
.

Windows is its size because of you the consumer...backwards compatibilty is a good chunk of that size increase. There are also several other reasons why it is that size...and many of them just have to do with the fact that the OS has to run on an infinite matrix of hardware which several other OSes out there don't have to.
As far as security, I'd warrant the average PC user can't really tell which OS is more secure than another...they can definitely tell which one gets attacked more than another...but thats another story
.Anyway, keep up the great work and let me know if I can PM you should I ever have a Vista question. Thanks!
Okay.. bad news.. this Dell doesn't like it at all! I tried to install all the old .net 1.1 and it still doesn't register it as being installed. Of course when I try to install it again it says it's installed. Jeez!
I need to find EvoScan .98 though, since I didn't get the new download link.
ECU flash and Mitsulogger "seem" to work.. haven't plugged it into the car yet.
I need to find EvoScan .98 though, since I didn't get the new download link.
ECU flash and Mitsulogger "seem" to work.. haven't plugged it into the car yet.
Codgi -- Sorry if you felt like I was anti-MSFT. I am in general a MSFT fan and a long time shareholder. I almost joined the company back in the early 90's after racing with a now retired exec. I understand your points about backward compatibility, but am not sure that is the driver of increased size and processor requirements.
Anyway, keep up the great work and let me know if I can PM you should I ever have a Vista question. Thanks!
Anyway, keep up the great work and let me know if I can PM you should I ever have a Vista question. Thanks!
.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post








