Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Soultrader

Windows Vista... 2 thumbs down

Recommended Posts

Spent over 6 hours today saving files, moving them, etc.. to upgrade to a Vista Business Edition. Such a junkie to new tech gadgets and software I had high hopes for this one. WRONG!! For those looking to purchase Vista, I highly recommend you stick with XP. Vista is extremely slow and not ideal for traders who want a fast machine. I would say you need at least 2gb of RAM to run this thing smoothly.

 

Now with Office 2007.... I couldnt even understand how to use excel that I had to switch back to Office 2003. grrrrrrrrrr.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XP is great. My E6600 duo with 2GB of fast ram is happy to stay with XP.

 

The true techies who've been upgrading to vista are saying "at least 4 GB of ram" ... and don't forget that this implies the computer has to move all this stuff around to use the extra RAM (time).

 

The weird thing is that all these laptops are now coming out with Vista and 512MB. And vista won't play high quality legitimate video with as good a resolution as you can get with XP. Vista: "You can't always get what you want."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Office 2007 is total junk. It's designed so that people who didn't know how to use the previous versions can find stuff easier but if you already know how to find what you need then you'll be annoyed that everything has been moved. I'll definitely be trying the 64 bit version of Vista though because I hear that if you have a decent system it will run faster than XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  notouch said:
Office 2007 is total junk. It's designed so that people who didn't know how to use the previous versions can find stuff easier but if you already know how to find what you need then you'll be annoyed that everything has been moved. I'll definitely be trying the 64 bit version of Vista though because I hear that if you have a decent system it will run faster than XP.

 

 

ahhh yes completely. They made it so annoying. It was taking me more than 30min to figure out a small function in excel that out of frustration I switched back to my old office. Although the new Word is nice.... even outlook was annoying.

 

On a quick note: The only thing good about Vista is the new sidebar gadgets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long now before Microsoft issues an "update" for XP that breaks it in order to force people to move to Vista?

 

Be careful of those "essential updates" from now on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on guys.. knowing Microsoft's legendary history of delivering bug laden and cumbersome software, especially during major upgrades, it makes little sense to rush out and become one of the early adopters.

 

They claim this software is the first product that cues its own performance to the hardware capacities of your individual pc. That may well be true but my guess is it is slanted towards having the most high end components possible if you want decent performance from it and thus we all should probably remain content with using XP in whatever version we have grown comfortable, at least for the time being (or a Mac, for those who got fed up with all this stuff long ago).

 

When I decide to invest in a new trading pc, I intend to have a certain party build it (that's all they do) and I am sure they will accommodate me by loading it with my old reliable XP until such time as Vista is modified to run better on the majority of machines out there (which may take quite some time.)

 

Happy Trading ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't upgraded to Vista (yet) and probably won't for awhile. I never really liked being a guniea pig in my opinion of running a new OS right away.

 

As for Office 07, it takes some getting used to, but there are some neat features hidden in there. Like anything else new, it takes time to get used to, esp as you become more and more dependent on the current version. For example, Excel now has quick access to formula building stuff that is very convenient for me now. Outlook has the ability to send text messages to cell phones! There is some great stuff in Office 07.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Kiwi said:
Beware of text messages from outlook ... you might find that the receiver has to pay for them and gets pretty sore with you if you use up their account.

 

Kiwi - yes, it's just like texting from your regular phone, just a lot more convenient for when you need to!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  notouch said:
Office 2007 is total junk. It's designed so that people who didn't know how to use the previous versions can find stuff easier but if you already know how to find what you need then you'll be annoyed that everything has been moved. I'll definitely be trying the 64 bit version of Vista though because I hear that if you have a decent system it will run faster than XP.

 

You better read January's PC World before you spend all this money.

They report there is little difference between the two. Many users went back to the 32bit version due to the lack of 64 bit drivers. AND, M$ Vista won't let you use any 64 bit drivers that M$ hasn't approved, (I wonder if approval has something to do with paying Gates?)

 

Now, I can't remember the source, but I remember all of us around the water cooler talking about the one article somewhere that compared XP with Vista, both 32 and 64 bit. In all cases, VISTA was slower, AND, it ran slower on Dual Core machines!! As I stated, I can't substantiate it at this time, I can't remember the article.

 

Conclusion, I will not be buying Vista at all, AND Office 07 went too far on the simplicity side and its now burdensome for those who don't need all the extra movements so they don't get lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  TinGull said:
*whispers* get a mac.....get a mac........

 

I'm to addicted to my right mouse button to go to some single button mouse clicking system!!!!!!!

 

Yea Vista blows chunks. My mate got it and he deleted it a day later went back to XP. Always to slow. Didn't get it myself was to scared to. I just got a new PC with 2bg of Ram and i dont want to feel like i wasted my hard earned on a 2 bit system. They're going to have to do something to make it run smoother especially the business pack because the last thing any business owner wants is more downtime!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me 2 years to move away from Window 2000 Pro, and the only reason that I move is because XP boot up faster.

 

I will do the same with Vista. wait till MS work out all their bug and hardware price come down further.

 

weiwei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cooter

Windows 2000 rules. Unfortunately, it isn't supported by MSFT anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows 2000 is supported for another 3 years yet. I have an old laptop with a Celeron 500 and 64MB of RAM running Windows 2000 and it's amazing how well it runs - very stable. You can make Windows XP look identical to Windows 2000 by switching to classic windows desktop. I think it looks a lot better than the kiddie-looking XP default.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah notouch on my trading machine i use the classic windows desktop as it not only is less distracting, you get slightly more screen space as the start bar and title bars require less space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cooter
  notouch said:
Windows 2000 is supported for another 3 years yet. I have an old laptop with a Celeron 500 and 64MB of RAM running Windows 2000 and it's amazing how well it runs - very stable. You can make Windows XP look identical to Windows 2000 by switching to classic windows desktop. I think it looks a lot better than the kiddie-looking XP default.

 

Since when? Case in point:

 

The recent update for the change in Daylight Savings Time. Guess which fix would NOT work with Windows 2000 machines?

 

I thought I heard that Win2K (on SP6 or so, now) was declared to be at the end of its support life. If you can get decent support and drivers for Win2K, by all means, go for it.

 

It's more stable than XP, and actually faster, because of the lower overhead. I'm think of actually going BACK to Win2K, just to see if Tradestation will run any faster or smoother with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, frankly- it sucks.

 

It just freezes up for no reason whatsoever. All the browsers (IE/Firefox) will just sh*t the bed for no reason for 5-10 minutes. Brand new computer Dual Core, all that jazz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have a laptop with Vista, we brought it into Best Buy today and asked them to put XP back on.

 

I have office 2007, it sucks. I can't find half the things I want and the help feature blows.

 

My next trading PC will have windows XP no doubt, my biggest pet peeve is slow computers. My next laptop will be a mac, and all I will do with it is mess around online, nothing big.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hehehe... I bought myself a laptop also. Using Vista with Office 2007! I use it for entertainment purposes so its okay but for trading it would be a piece of crap. I think Windows XP classic default is the best way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.