Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Software Tool Strips Windows Vista To Bare Bones

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the if-it-works dept.

472

Preedit writes "A free download that can cut Windows Vista's gargantuan footprint by half or more is developing a big following on the Internet. vLite is a configuration tool that lets users automatically delete a lot of unnecessary Vista components — such as Windows Media Player and MSN installer — to pare the OS down to a reasonable size. The software is catching on. An InformationWeek story notes that a forum that asks users to suggest new features has drawn nearly 50,000 page views. Meanwhile, Microsoft officials have themselves conceded that Vista is "bloated" and are developing the next version of Windows on a core called MinWin, which is smaller than Vista by an order of magnitude."

cancel ×

472 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Vista XP is here! (3, Insightful)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208278)

I'm failing to see any reason to upgrade to Vista at all (I don't even like Halo, so Halo 3 is a no no.. and if a lot of games start requiring Vista then I'll just have to move to console gaming).

Re:Vista XP is here! (5, Funny)

dave420 (699308) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208342)

It's much faster than XP, uses your memory and other resources far more intelligently, and the performance benefits of DX10 over DX9 (even with some DX10 trickery involved) are things you simply can't find in any other OS out there, open source or otherwise. That's just an FYI.

Re:Vista XP is here! (4, Informative)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208400)

That's funny, I used it on my uncle's 2.2Ghz Core 2 Duo (0.2 Ghz faster than my laptop, and they both have 2GB of RAM), and it was a pig compared to XP. Taking up 15GB of HD space and half my video memory for a fancy 3D interface what is essentially a file and program manager isn't what I call intelligent use of resources either.. even Microsoft seem to have noticed that, if you actually read the article..

Re:Vista XP is here! (0, Troll)

dave420 (699308) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208576)

If you think the OS is the GUI, then fine - you got me. But, if you know the OS isn't the GUI, and you knew of the new features of Vista, read this post [slashdot.org] for a decent break-down of some areas Vista excels at.

Re:Vista XP is here! (4, Insightful)

BrentH (1154987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208856)

The GUI is definitely part of the GUI, or were you trying to argue otherwise? The OS is in this case Microsoft Windows Vista in it's entirety, not some arbitrary pieces of it. With Aero being enabled if possible automatically by the OS, and being an order of magnitude more resource consuming than for example OSX and Compiz, the OS is indeed much more sluggish than XP or some others. And let us not talk about the performance benefits of DX10 over DX9. Review and gamesites show time and time again Vista with DX10 is slower when compared to the same game on the same machine with DX9, and the benefits are minimal. Even Microsofts own latest Flight Simulator which was to be a DX10 showcase performs better on XP, and is visually nearly the same (checkout the various FS forums for more anecdotal evidence). Yes, Vista is better than XP in some aspects, but as a whole the OS just offers less than XP for many if not most. The pros are mostly pros on paper where the cons are immeadeately obvious, even for normal users.

Re:Vista XP is here! (2, Interesting)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208882)

I know fine that the OS does a lot more, but the improvements (which are really good ideas, like leaving out backwards compatibility in DX10 etc to get rid of some bloat) have been totally counteracted by the GUI for one (yeah I know you don't have to use Aero), and DRM, whatever the **** is causing the 'long goodbye' and so on.. and sure prefetching is also a good thing to do in some cases (though if it's done badly then things just slow down even more with loads of stuff that you don't want being prefetched.. take the stupid Adobe 'Speedlaunch' for example..). I though that after XP Microsoft had started getting their act together, but so far it just seems like it was a fluke.. now that they've had a shock though maybe they will get their act together.. like Intel had to do to come up with the Core processors after the embarrassment that was the P4s/Ds

Re:Vista XP is here! (2, Interesting)

Loconut1389 (455297) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208598)

how did you determine how much video memory was in use? is there a generic tool for that?

Re:Vista XP is here! (3, Insightful)

Firehed (942385) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208880)

I certainly can't think of a better way to manage resources than to make sure there's as much free RAM as possible. It's not like it's two or more orders of magnitude faster than reading from the hard drive or anything.

Seriously, is anyone going to ever realize that unused RAM is wasted RAM? As long as it's smart about what's being swapped in and when, then so much the better. I'd love to see apps pre-cached.

I'll give you hard drive space, not that it really matters these days with half a terabyte at under $100. But the rest of the system's resources are not consumed the same way, and as such unused resources are being wasted. I didn't buy 4GB just so I can win a pissing contest about how much RAM my system has free. I bought 4GB so my computer can use it. I don't care how it's allocated so long as it provides me a snappier experience (and it does).

Re:Vista XP is here! (3, Insightful)

crmarvin42 (652893) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209044)

is anyone going to ever realize that unused RAM is wasted RAM?
Of course unused RAM isn't wasted if you're not doing anything. I want my OS to use some ram, but most I want to be used by the applications I'm running on top of the OS. Most people don't do most of their work inside the OS itself. They do their work inside the applications running on top of the OS and if the OS is hogging all of the RAM then their work will take longer as RAM constraints get tight and everything slows down. No OS in this day in age should require 4GB RAM just to make the OS run "snappier"

I'll give you hard drive space, not that it really matters these days with half a terabyte at under $100.
This may be fine for desktops, but not for Laptops which make up > 50% of machines sold to individuals these days. The drives available for a reasonably sized laptop don't reach that much storage, and are a lot more expensive at any size. I bought my laptop less than a year ago and the most storage offered was 120GB, I don't want >10% of my drive, or more than half of my installed ram devoted just to the OS.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208438)

It is not faster than XP. Possibly if you have a computer with 4 GB of RAM it might run a little faster, because it has smarter caching, but I highly doubt that anyway. And also, in that case, you probably would have a computer so fast, that any speed improvement would be extremely small. I have a laptop with 512 MB of RAM that came preinstalled with Vista, and trust me, XP runs a lot faster. Linux runs faster than both.

Re:Vista XP is here! (3, Informative)

everphilski (877346) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208604)

Add a gig of RAM ($20-$30) and you will notice a market improvement in Vista performance. I bought a $300 Vista laptop computer back in August and added a gig of RAM. Dual-booted XP and Vista for awhile and wound up getting rid of the XP partition because there was no noticeable difference in performance.

Yes, Vista loves the RAM, but the other part of the equation is the 512M of RAM you have (which is minuscule by today's standards) is also being shared by the video card. By default, at least on my machine, it would share up to 128M with the video card, that's 25% of your RAM!

Re:Vista XP is here! (5, Informative)

lucifig (255388) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208440)

It's much faster than XP...
Wha wha what? Maybe on paper but not in the real world. I have a 2 processor 3ghz Xeon machine with 2 gb of ram. Not made for Vista admittedly but still a fairly decent machine. With a clean install of Vista it takes me around 5-10 seconds to delete a file. To delete a simple file sitting on my desktop. Again, I live in the real world things may be different in the Marketing world.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208596)

What the? How the heck does it take 5-10 sec to delete a file? You must be running something really wonky there. I have a comparable machine (3 gb of RAM, quad-processor CPU) and it takes, um, a fraction of a second? The same time I'm used to having it take. You need to run some maintenance on your machine to get it to run the way it's supposed to...

Re:Vista XP is here! (4, Informative)

everphilski (877346) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208640)

Something is wrong then because I have a low-end Sempron notebook with 1.5gb RAM, vista home and deletion is almost instantaneous...

Vista isn't perfect, but it's better than most of the (uninformed or lacking in experience) critics give it credit for.

Re:Vista XP is here! (2, Informative)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208840)

With a clean install of Vista it takes me around 5-10 seconds to delete a file.
I had the same problem. My first experience with Vista was on my Presario c700 with 1GB RAM. After the first boot ( and once everything had settled) I started doing all the things that needed to be done like deleting the majority of the unnecessary desktop shortcuts. After hitting the delete key, I got a dialog something like "Vista is calculating the time to carry out this action"...... And it took about 15 to 20 Seconds for the entire process. I just found it DOG slow with almost everything.

Sure others have pointed out that I could add some ram and get my performance back, but I managed to get a major boost in performance for free (and in less time) by installing Ubuntu.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

metalcoat (918779) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209034)

I have to agree, my family has 2 hp notebooks each with a core 2 duo processor and 2gb of ram a piece. They are not identical but do take a ridiculous time to delete the smallest files.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208724)

Faster than XP how?

You know plenty of games (crysis [neowin.net] ,hellgate, etc use their full DX10 capability [techmixer.com] on DX9 and DX10 capable hardware and also in windows XP, right? It's not like vista uses up a drastically larger amount of memory or actually adds features you couldn't find in say linux [ubuntu.com] , is it?

All DX10 has done is added small graphic effects for transparency with water and smoke, that although they look beautiful, aren't the real reason DX10 was created. DX10 was created with virtualization in mind [chase.net.au] so microsoft could twist their patent deals with virtualization [slashdot.org] .

Sheesh, and you people wonder why Vista is an absolutely failed attempt at an OS from more perspectives than just people who hate microsoft.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208788)

http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3034 [anandtech.com]
(although the first page with charts I see is here: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3044&p=1 [anandtech.com] )

If Vista has better memory management than XP, then explain how the same program uses 250 to 500MB MORE on Vista than XP.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

sammyF70 (1154563) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208938)

Performance benefit of DX10 over DX9? Care to name your source?
HERE [anandtech.com] is one saying the contrary .. and it's just an example. Google for "dx10 dx9 performance comparison" and you should find plenty more.
As far as I know, the benefit of DX10 are slightly different (not always better in my opinion) visuals, and I concur with the Anandtech guys that many of the DX10 improvements could have been done in DX9 too.

[shudder] .. and here I am feeding the trolls again ...

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208992)

mods need to be given a sarcasm 101, the parent is either a troll or funny not informative. Vista and DX10 are slower than XP and DX9 and it has been well published.

Re:Vista XP is here! (0, Flamebait)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208490)

Wow I like how your utter lack of any insight whatsoever got modded insighful.

If you have a powerful enough machine then Vista's advantages remain while by far most of its disadvantages disappear. And by "powerful enough" I mean a $900 HP you could have picked up at a retail store 6 months ago. Nothing crazy.

You can upgrade for DX10, a better UI and search functionality, smarter resource management when you do have a lot of apps open, a FAR better multimedia experience if you're into watching movies or TV on your comp, actually good tablet (as in, Wacom) integration, etc.

If for now you're running into driver issues on Vista because of some hardware peripherals you want to keep using, then I can understand sticking with XP even when you get a new machine. But otherwise, you really shouldn't run into any deal-breakers as long as your machine has enough RAM (2-4 gigs), and RAM is cheap.

vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (0)

trolltalk.com (1108067) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208630)

"If you have a powerful enough machine then Vista's advantages remain while by far most of its disadvantages disappear. And by "powerful enough" I mean a $900 HP you could have picked up at a retail store 6 months ago. Nothing crazy."

By the time you add the cost of 3 years antivirus, 3 years other malware/bugware, etc., its cheaper to buy an iMac.

Or for that same $900, buy a lower-spec box + 2 22" lcd displays m($180 ea @tigerdirect), run linux and STILL have change left over.

Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (4, Insightful)

Torvaun (1040898) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208728)

3 years running AVG: $0
3 years running Ad-aware, Spybot, and CCleaner: $0

Now, I don't run Vista either, but saying it's cheaper to buy an iMac is a little disingenuous.

AVG not free for use on LANs or outside the home (3, Informative)

trolltalk.com (1108067) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208924)

From the AVG free version license: http://free.grisoft.com/doc/98/us/frt/0 [grisoft.com]

You must not use the program in a network or on more than one computer. This particular software version is distributed free of charge, therefore, the applicable license is only granted for home use thereof. In case of this free version, the program is not subject to any guarantees, and the user has no right to any technical support whatsoever.

So: http://www2.grisoft.com/doc/buy/us/crp/0 [grisoft.com] 2 years AVG Antivirus: $39
- or -
2 years AVG Internet Security: $70

So, 3 years of AVG Internet security is another $140.00. - total is $1,040.00

http://www.macmall.com/macmall/families/new_promo~dp~7349100~family~macbook~promo~1.asp [macmall.com] Apple MacBook: $1,019.00

The Apple is cheaper over 3 or more years.

Re:AVG not free for use on LANs or outside the hom (1)

Daltin (1153533) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209086)

How does making the user use the free version only at home, or not in a network force him to get the expensive business lincense and "Internet Security" suite?

Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (1)

chris_eineke (634570) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209048)

You might want to consider donating to the aforementioned makers of the software.

Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (1)

Daltin (1153533) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208756)

Couldn't I just cut those costs of virus protection by using Avira, or AVG, or one of the many other free anti-viruses on the Internet, along with a free anti-spyware checker? Not unlike you proposing we run Linux, a free OS. We could even be a smart user and not get viruses and malware!

Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (1)

trolltalk.com (1108067) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209060)

Not unlike you proposing we run Linux, a free OS. We could even be a smart user and not get viruses and malware!

Sure I did - look at the title: vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/*

That won't work in Windows, but it will work great on Windows :-)

Actually, "fdisk /dev/sda, d, 1, w, q" works even better.

We all know step 2 - reboot.

Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (2, Interesting)

afedaken (263115) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208790)

By the time you add the cost of 3 years antivirus,
Free as in beer [grisoft.com]

3 years other malware/bugware,
Free as in beer [safer-networking.org]

etc., its cheaper to buy an iMac.
Not free as in $1199. [apple.com]

Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (1, Interesting)

trolltalk.com (1108067) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209000)

As I point out here [slashdot.org] , AVG is not free if you use it outside the home, on a network, or in business. 4 years license for their AVG Internet Security (they sell it in 2-year increments, so 3 years means ypu have to pay for 4) is $140.00. $900.00 pc + $140.00 = $1,040.00

Also, I provided a like where you can get a MacBook for $1,019.

The mac is cheaper than the pc if you're going to keep it for more than 2 years, and you intend to network it (and who doesn't network their laptop) or you intend to use it outside the home (and who doesn't bring their laptop outside the home, and connect to wireless networks).

Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208814)

There are free Virus scanners out there (ClamWin is non-active and works well, but for active scanners Avast and AVG are both free for personal use and both work well). For spyware you have Adaware and Spybot which are available in personal editions for free, as well as MS's own Anispyware product (Windows Defender).

That being said, for a good user, spyware isn't really a problem (my spyware problems essentially are zilch just by a) not installing any random program that promotes itself, and b) using Firefox instead of IE).

Vista does have it's issues though. namely driver related. Playing iTunes videos off of a SATA hard drive connected to an Nvidia SATA controller still doesn't quite work right over a year after release. The WoW launcher app has never worked correctly on my Vista laptop (works if I directly launch WoW.exe though).

Overall, it's not TERRIBLE, but it does have it's issues (admittedly, I run the basic version so no Aero in the way, and I've reverted the Start menu to "classic" behavior). I do use a Mac desktop though and think that it is the BETTER option, but in no fair way can you call it the CHEAPER option. I have a Linux box too (usually Gentoo, but I'm playing with OpenSUSE atm), but it's more for playing around with Linux than to actually get anything done with it.

Re:Vista XP is here! (2, Funny)

Razed By TV (730353) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208752)

If you have a powerful enough machine
...then you could run XP that much faster than Vista.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

Paralizer (792155) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208826)

But otherwise, you really shouldn't run into any deal-breakers as long as your machine has enough RAM (2-4 gigs), and RAM is cheap.
I think this really helps your argument. If I'm going to buy a new computer it's probably going to have 2-4+ GB of RAM anyway, so it makes sense for me to take advantage of the latest and greatest technological achievements with the new features provided by Vista.

Hardware is cheap, let the programs that want to use it use it. If I install a program on Vista that needs more RAM because I'm running low on system resources, I can just go get more.

If it works it works.

Re:Vista XP is here! (2, Insightful)

CambodiaSam (1153015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208958)

I've tried it on a multitude of powerful machines, and Vista still can't hack it *overall*. For my recent purchase of a Dell m1730 gaming laptop, I went with XP. Yes, it CAN support Vista, and probably fine, but why would I want to trade 20% of my system resources away for what I see as no gain?

As the unfortunate soul in my company that has to primarily deal with Microsoft, I was in the unique spot of writing our company's position document on it. In short: Vista is unsupported. There's a lot more than hardware specs that went into that decision. Compatibility, reliability, user interface, etc.

The true test will be when Vista SP1 is put head-to-head with XP SP3. If Vista can't perform at least EQUALLY as well as XP, then I predict most people will wait the 2 years to see if Windows 7 will be worth it.

Re:Vista XP is here! (0, Troll)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209078)

Apart from the fact that I've never really wanted to use any Microsoft OS (I do appreciate a couple of their products though - I liked VC++ 6, and the Exchange Server/Outlook combo is pretty decent.. other than that they don't really make anything that others don't do better - and usually for much cheaper or even free), then yes. And apart from the fact that that goes against my whole philosophy on coding and computer use in general. The OS shouldn't be using the majority of your resources. It should be managing the hardware, allocating memory and time to apps, blah blah, and keeping the hell out of the way the rest of the time. I'm sure my Macbook Pro would have no issues running Vista, but I don't care, I'm not giving MS money for creating something that is an affront to my sensibilities. The sooner they die, the better off the world will be. When I started off with computers, I was using a Commodore 100, several Amigas from OS 1.3 to 3.0, and Macs from the original Classic (not sure what version of Mac OS it used). All of them have been somehow just nicer to use than Windows. All of them were generally more responsive than Windows too, running on processors that have 1000 times less power than what we have today. I know the system bus and speed of HDs, RAM, and so on affects performance as well as clock speed, but we should have a lot more than we do have. Microsoft are finally starting to get seriously threatened by the Linux camp these days, and it can only be a good thing for everyone.

Re:Vista XP is here! (1)

SailorSpork (1080153) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208502)

I'm going to point out that this package is a Godsend for those of us that have Vista because we've bought a new computer in the past few months. If I had a choice, I would have just carried over my XP license from my old laptop, but... M$'s (and their PC making buainess partner's) business model trumps their customer service model, so my old laptop didn't come with the XP install disks to allow that. So... 3 cheers for the de-bloater!

Re:Vista XP is here! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208832)

my old laptop didn't come with the XP install disks to allow that


On most systems I've seen, the base pieces for the install disk are there.

If you use nLite, and point it at the installed system, it can usually re-generate install media for you.

I have a ThinkPad (with no install disk) where I lost access to the restore partition. Using nLite, I was able to create an install disk by pointing it to the i386 and DRIVERS directories on the installed system.

I upgraded the HDD and now had an installable XP to use. I used the Magical Jellybean Keyfinder to get my actual XP install key to plug into nLite so that the install wouldn't even prompt for it.

My new install is much better than the old base install, as there was nothing installed that I didn't specifically want to have installed on the system. (Plus it now dual-boots with Ubuntu 7.10)

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208850)

Why would I need Vista if i'm going to strip it down?
I mean, if microsoft manages to convince me and I'm gonna install Vista, the WHY on EARTH would I bother to install the software.
If I need a fast OS, the i see NO SINGLE reason to upgrade to Vista either.
Conclusion: there is no REAL markt for such kinda software.

Beta worked well (4, Informative)

psychicsword (1036852) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208284)

This software has been out for a while as a beta I have used it and it works well. I haven't used the newer version yet but I assume based on nLite that it can only get better from there.

Re:Beta worked well (2, Informative)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208474)

I used nlite after needing to slipstream my RAID drivers into my windows install. (no floppy drive.) At the same time I removed all the bloat (media player, explorer, msn, explore XP intro etc, and included a bunch of updates with the tool offline-updates [heise-security.co.uk] .

I considered trying vlite on the recovery disks that I made with my laptop (presario c700 (1GB RAM)) right before I overwrote it with Ubuntu. But there wouldn't be much point as the Ubuntu has proven to be much more responsive and offers the encrypted install option with the 'alternate' install.

Anyone had success with vlite or nlite on OEM 'recovery' disks?

Slashdot = Clicks (3, Insightful)

ynososiduts (1064782) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208302)

Well they (just got/are going to get) a WHOLE lot more..

Re:Slashdot = Clicks (4, Funny)

Slashidiot (1179447) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208522)

And the 50000 page views are hard-coded on the article! That's soooo web 1.0...

Re:Slashdot = Clicks (1)

TAiNiUM (66843) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208936)

Nuhagic said he doesn't know exactly how many downloads vLite has seen -- but a forum that asks users to submit suggestions for the next version has drawn almost 50,000 views.
Here [msfn.org] is the forum they are referring to. The vLite and nLite forums are hosted by MSFN [msfn.org] which has other, similar projects [msfn.org] and an active forum community [msfn.org] .

The next step... (4, Funny)

Chonnawonga (1025364) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208304)

Great. Now somebody turn this into a virus, and we're all set.

Re:The next step... (5, Informative)

psychicsword (1036852) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208360)

This tool works by modifying the original install disk and you make your own more compact version of the installer. It does not work by modifying your currently installed OS.

Re:The next step... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208460)

Not really sure what you're implying that we're set for..?

1. Make a crappy bloated OS that even non geeks think is a stinking pile of poo.

2. Release a program to strip out all the unnecessary stuff (90%??)

3. Add a virus to said useful piece of software.

4. ???!?!

5. Profit!! \o/

Re:The next step... (1)

Chonnawonga (1025364) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208566)

I certainly won't argue that Vista is a crappy bloated OS, etc. etc. You wouldn't catch me dead using it! What we're all set for is turning that crappy bloated OS into a crappy non-bloated OS, thereby reducing unnecessary hardware upgrades, excess power use, DRM-related nonsense in Windows Media Player, and so on and so on. In the mean time, people can use more useful software on their Windows machines (which is generally ported Unix-based software anyway) thereby easing the eventual transition to Linux. But really, it was just an off-hand joke.

Thanks, but (1, Insightful)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208314)

I'll stick with Gentoo. Load what I use, don't load what I don't.

Re:Thanks, but (5, Insightful)

dave420 (699308) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208424)

But what if there are some things you want to load (say, DirectX 10) which you can't load in Gentoo? Are you supposed to rejoice in the fact you got to choose which components you wanted in your functionality-lacking OS install? Being able to customise an OS install is not as important as being able to use that OS to perform tasks you want. I can't use Gentoo because it doesn't run the applications I need (Adobe, Office, games). Not that I'm knocking Gentoo, I just don't see how your argument is anything but fanboyish nose-cutting/face-spiting posturing, desperately trying to ilicit "hear hear"s from the rest of the slashdot crowd.

Re:Thanks, but (1)

ynososiduts (1064782) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208432)

If that's the reason you use gentoo. May I suggest installing just the base of Debian, Arch, or Frugalware and just use their packaging tools to add what packages you want to the base install. You can have a fully functional desktop with a small footprint that's i686 optimized in under 15 minutes that way, as compared to the hours of a Gentoo install. It would be interesting if Windows did something similar. Like a Vista Enthusiast edition where they just install the base and you decide what luxuries you want. I can't see it cathing on, but it would be nice to have a barebones windows install without the 194538421 services that start when you boot.

Re:Thanks, but (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208748)

I've not used Gentoo, but if you want to load what you want and not load what you don't then a source-based distribution has a lot of advantages. Try running ./configure --help on one of the packages you use frequently. There are typically a large range of options and distributing every possible combination in binary form is impossible. By selecting the ones you want, you can often eliminate several dependencies (which have their own dependencies and so on).

That is a Convenience Some Cannot Afford (4, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208480)

I'll stick with Gentoo. Load what I use, don't load what I don't.
This is sage advice for you and I. However, we constitute maybe 0.05% of the populace (I do not mean to be elitist). You may find me on the other side soon in the unwashed 99.95% of the populace as I once enjoyed spending a whole Saturday installing a new Linux distro or "emerging" and acquiring a few new packages I didn't have.

I do not have this kind of time anymore. The other day I received an e-mail from a friend. He wanted to know how he could get the absolute most out of his hardware for a very specific game he plays (World of Warcraft). I began with recommending plain old Linux and then installing wine and trying to run it. But I soon realized how hopeless this would be as I think he has a nice ATI card that once was top of the line five months ago.

So I told him to get a fresh XP install and not install anything else on it. Perhaps this MinWin or core of a Windows will satisfy him? Perhaps it will also satisfy me in finding simplicity in an operating system that can run my games and programs that are only for win32?

Re:That is a Convenience Some Cannot Afford (3, Informative)

Entropius (188861) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208634)

The unwashed masses can just install Ubuntu. I was a doubter until I tried it a month ago -- it installed in 10 minutes painlessly and everything Just Works.

Re:That is a Convenience Some Cannot Afford (1)

Toasty16 (586358) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208928)

...(I do not mean to be elitist). You may find me on the other side soon in the unwashed 99.95% of the populace...

Sure, there's no way you're being elitist by referring to the majority as "the unwashed masses"...

Thought i'd help you find a girlfriend (1)

Project2501a (801271) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208494)

emeger stlib; emerge kde4

run those two commands on your pc, go out of your basement and don't come back till those two are finished.

Re:Thanks, but (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208510)

Yeah, that's pretty much what they are doing - only using Windows instead of Linux.

MS makes an OS like this - Windows Embedded [microsoft.com] . The philosophy appeals to me on some level, but for a consumer OS there are some negative implications. For instance, if I buy a new game that uses ActiveX but I chose not to install ActiveX when I installed the OS... well, now there is a search for my Windows disk and a reboot in my future and people will bitch about Windows requiring the original disk and reboots. Even if the reboot can be engineered out, it still sucks a bit.

I can't speak for everyone, but since I usually use an older version of Windows and buy pretty decent hardware, I just do a full install of Windows because performance isn't an issue. If I ever install Vista, it will be 2 or so years from now on a computer well above the recommended specs for Vista. I mostly don't ever want to insert the install disk again.

Re:Thanks, but (1)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208816)

Load what I use, don't load what I don't.

I think this can be true for most Microsoft products. You just have to wade through the menus at intstall time. Their defaults are designed for "most people". I don't install Clippy (or the eight alternativies), and it's smaller and better because of that. I'm just curious how many people have set up a Linux box and then spent the same time (a day or two) configuring a Windows install. Because, I'm willing to bet that Windows becomes more lean and secure etc. with that much setup time.

The people from MS aren't dumb. And most of their features are for an enterprise OS. I wonder what happens when you pare it down.

Vista Fully Striped=? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208322)

1- MSDOS
2- WindowsXP
3- Linux Kernel
4- MinWin (lawl)
5- 1 bit program
6- YO MOMMA STRIPED (to test the educated ones)
7- CowboyNealOS

Place ur bets NOW!

Re:Vista Fully Striped=? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208430)

Striped? My momma ain't RAID-5, boy!

Which Magnitude? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208326)

Well, it's a random number from 1 to 9, with 9 doing the most damage

wait, we're not talking about pokemon?

Saving hard disk space is not a gain (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208364)

Hard disk space is cheap,
Doe this tool speed it up or render it more stable ?
Make it work better with things like unsigned drivers .
Remove DRM ?
If not, it really is of little benefit !

Software Tool Strips Windows Vista To Bare Bones.. (4, Funny)

niceone (992278) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208382)

.. and then pushes it into a freezing lake?

vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... (5, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208396)

... unless and until it removes the draconian, RIAA- and MPAA-friendly DRM from the OS, and returns control of the PC back to the user who bought it.

Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208496)

Returns control back to the user?

Are you kidding me? We already have keyboards and mice! What more do you want?!

Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... (2, Insightful)

dave420 (699308) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208506)

Care to enlighten us to this crippling DRM that is dragging Vista down? As I've yet to be stopped doing anything with any media I have. I rip DVDs, I take off DRM from downloaded tracks, everything I've done on XP and Linux.

Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... (4, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208628)

I think people are upset because it will preempt you from doing these things with next-generation media. DVDs are technically protected, but only the hardware enforces this. People are upset because MS moved some of the support into software, and at such a level that it actually slows things down a bit and makes the OS more complicated even for people who do nothing at all with video.

Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... (3, Insightful)

Experiment 626 (698257) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208726)

Care to enlighten us to this crippling DRM that is dragging Vista down? As I've yet to be stopped doing anything with any media I have. I rip DVDs, I take off DRM from downloaded tracks, everything I've done on XP and Linux.

Okay, so suppose I wanted to install a backdoor on your system (this is more or less what DRM is, a way for hostile third parties to exercise control over a computer that trumps the owner's wishes). It'll only sap your system resources by a few percent; you probably won't even notice it's there. And in return, you'll gain the ability to do something completely useless with your system, like how DRM opens the door for you to enjoy "protected media".

Not a very good deal, is it? Vista's DRM may not be "crippling", but it definitely should be an optional install.

Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... (1)

Beriaru (954082) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208962)

Try using a modified driver to record the audio or video output. Or try to watch a HD movie in your capable-but-not-certified TFT. Or just compare the performance of any given GPU in XP vs Vista. The poor performance in Vista can give you a clue where the problem is.

nLite (3, Informative)

Nimey (114278) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208442)

The same people also have a tool called nLite, which does the same stuff for Windows XP. It works well for stuff like slipstreaming SATA drivers, but I've had a few problems when I used more advanced features like removing un-needed Windows components -- when installing stuff like .NET from Windows Update, Windows required me to put in the XP install disc, which obviously is non-workable for user desktops.

To be fair, that was an older version (1.3?), and they've had a couple of releases since then.

One Better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208448)

I have amazing software that reduces the footprint of Windows Vista to almost nothing. It's called Ubuntu Linux 7.10 (Gutsy). After you install it, the footprint is reduced to whatever space the Vista box takes up in the landfill.

Remember: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

conservative to replace excessive & wasteful? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208458)

you can bet your .asp. but don't hold your breath. all change evolves from need. let yOUR conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/ts_alt_afp/ushealthfrancemortality;_ylt=A9G_RngbRIVHsYAAfCas0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A [nytimes.com]

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html [cnn.com]

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html [cnn.com]

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html [cnn.com]

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece [timesonline.co.uk]
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up (4, Insightful)

adonoman (624929) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208472)

MinWin is a non-graphical kernel that doesn't do much more than boot up and host a webserver. It's not exactly a full functional operating system, so yes it's going to be considerably smaller.

Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up (5, Funny)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208538)

MinWin is a non-graphical kernel that doesn't do much more than boot up and host a webserver. It's not exactly a full functional operating system, so yes it's going to be considerably smaller.

Point is that by getting the cruft out of the kernel customization will be easier and the result probably still overall smaller.

Amazing ideas these MS boys have these days. Imagine an operating system with a small, even micro, kernel. To this the user can add the operating system toys that he needs around that kernel, resulting in a lean, mean operating system that does what he needs and nothing more.

I hear some crazy Finnish guy had a similar idea once but nobody listened to him.

Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up (2, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208768)

Ooooo, the pendants are going to get you for implying that Linux uses a "micro" kernel.

Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22209092)

Not to mention the pedants, too!

Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22209008)

Nitpick : Linux isn't a microkernel.

NT originally had definite microkernel influences e.g. separate graphics subsystem, but it wasn't long before they were rolled up into a (mostly) monolithic architecture for performance reasons.

Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208978)

MinWin is a non-graphical kernel that doesn't do much more than boot up and host a webserver. It's not exactly a full functional operating system, so yes it's going to be considerably smaller.
But theoretically you could run KDE [kde.org] (at least when Vista support is released)... That would be an interesting comparison.

Add free version (4, Informative)

christurkel (520220) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208504)

A free software tool that promises to strip down the Windows Vista operating system -- which even some Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) officials have called "bloated" -- to a minimalist state is attracting big interest on the Internet.

vLite, created by developer Dino Nuhagic, automatically removes a number of non-essential Windows Vista components in order to pare the OS's heavy footprint by half or more.

vLite allows users to preselect numerous Vista features for automatic removal prior to installing the OS on their personal computers. Among them: Windows Media Player, Windows Photo Viewer, MSN Installer, Wallpapers, SlideShow, Windows Mail and other utilities.

"It's not just about hard disk space. There is also an increase in OS responsiveness and you don't have to tolerate all kinds of things you don't use," said Nuhagic, in an e-mail to InformationWeek explaining why he launched the project.

vLite, however, isn't for the technically timid. The software warns that the changes it imposes on Vista are "permanent, so be sure in your choice."

Nuhagic said he doesn't know exactly how many downloads vLite has seen -- but a forum that asks users to submit suggestions for the next version has drawn almost 50,000 views.

The emergence of tools like vLite reflect the frustrations voiced by many computer users over Vista's bulk and resource requirements.

Loaded with an abundance of features and tools designed to ease navigation and bolster security, the Home Premium and Ultimate editions of Vista both require a whopping 15 GBs of available disk space for installation. By contrast, Windows XP -- Vista's predecessor -- requires 1.5 GB of available space for installation of the Professional version.

With Vista bearing a footprint 10 times larger than XP's, even Microsoft officials are expressing concerns about Windows' growing waistline. Speaking last year at the University of Illinois, Microsoft distinguished engineer Eric Traut said the operating system had become bloated.

"A lot of people think of Windows as this large, bloated operating system. That may be a fair characterization," said Traut.

In response to such concerns, Traut said Microsoft has adopted a new, modular approach to OS development that will yield more streamlined products beginning with Windows 7 -- a successor to Windows Vista that's expected to be available some time in 2010.

The approach calls for Windows developers to use a bare bones version of the OS -- dubbed MinWin -- as the building block for their next programming effort. MinWin is built on about 25 MBs of data -- making it smaller than Windows Vista by an order of magnitude.

Until it's ready, there's always programs like vLite.

Not The Operating System (5, Insightful)

gsslay (807818) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208542)

I don't think it's fair to call Vista a bloated operating system. You look at the list of crud that this tool removes; that's not Operating System, that's application crud that should be optional in the install anyway.

Just because MS wants it to be part of the compulsory install (all the better to monopolise your computer and online profile) doesn't make it part of the operating system. I mean, come on, what makes MSN Installer part of an OS?

rm -rf \ (0, Redundant)

smartin (942) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208568)

Works for me.

Re:rm -rf \ (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208810)

Damn you! My Linux install just went away, but Vista is still there!

Re:rm -rf \ (1)

gazbo (517111) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208950)

What does that do? Recursively force-delete a directory whose name is a single space?

Re:rm -rf \ (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 6 years ago | (#22209064)

'rm' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file.

Order of magnitude description is not quite right. (2, Interesting)

Kaptain Kruton (854928) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208588)

I think the person that said that MinWin is smaller than vista by an order of magnitude needs to rethink their description or check their numbers. The article says that Vista Ultimate requires 15GB to install (I am not sure if it is saying 15GB is only needed during the installation process or it needs that much after installation). However, the article also states that MinWin is based on 25MB of data. The article does not say how large an entire installation of MinWin will be. However the article phrases things in a way that leads me to believe they were only speaking of the base of MinWin when stating that it is smaller than vista by an order of magnitude. The differences is more than an mere order of magnitude.

Very good news for VMWare and gamers (5, Informative)

(H)elix1 (231155) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208590)

nLite let you tune the core OS install - exposing uninstall options the 'default' installer, letting you fold in service packs and patches, drivers, pre-sorting license keys, users, and custom settings. When you get done, you can do a clean slate install and end up with something that won't take another four hours of tweaking to get where you wish was a starting point directly from the ISO.

I started using nLite to build an XP distro that would run on a CF card. Running minimal services, I noticed how much faster it was too -- became the install for my gaming rig. Space was also a concern when building VMWare images, so starting with a mean clean install was a godsend. Granted, it took a couple tries - it is very easy to kill off a critical bit when you do this sort of chainsaw sculpture to the OS. Once you get it right, it is a fantastic (free!) tool. It is wonderful to see the same technology available to Vista.

So... (-1, Redundant)

Ninety-9 (1207808) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208610)

...in essence, this software performs a few program uninstallations and file deletes. It removes all of the crap you can (should be able to) remove on your own. Sorry for being so dense, I haven't spent much time on Vista, but removing things like WMP, Outlook, and MSN...sounds like crap I've been doing in XP for years. I mean, I can "Streamline" XP by removing those programs or components, deleting the setup files, and then going into Services (or msconfig) for a little process clean-up.

For some of you Vista users, does this seem like enough? Doesn't sound it to me.

McWindows? (1)

sjaguar (763407) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208632)

Did anyone else misread "MinWin" as McWin?

Re:McWindows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208986)

No

ok... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208654)

to be quite honest, it's pretty sad that microsoft had to bloat vista so much and screw everyone over. funny how they expect you to upgrade from xp, while tools like this have to be created.....

We'll see MinWin in 2010... not (5, Insightful)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208672)

Yeah, right. A big company's approach to all difficult problems is to imagine a solution for them and create a name for that solution. Problem? Vista is bloated. Solution: create the name "MinWin."

If Microsoft wanted to reduce Vista's bloat, they'd just reduce it.

They might, if they had any good faith about it, analyze and SQA vLite and license it or offer and approved version. Or structure the present Vista so that it installs a reasonable core and allows you to "opt in" to the extra stuff.

What's likely happening is a turf battle between all the managers that want their bloat in the product, are threatened by any suggestions that it be trimmed, and will fight it's being trimmed to the death--or at least for a couple of years when they move on to their next assignment.

If MinWin happens at all, what will happen is that they'll trim Vista by 20% and then pack on 100% of new bloat.

Re:We'll see MinWin in 2010... not (2, Insightful)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208960)

Microsoft would never offer something like vLite or nLite to end users.

It's hard enough to test the current limited set of installation options. vLite gives far more possibilities and would therefore need far more testing. Most likely a commercial company that did it would get a reputation for producing unstable software. Microsoft don't have a perfect reputation with the limited options they offer now of course, but offering nLite would make things worse.

Open source stuff can do this of course, but that's because the people adding the options don't have to respond to clueless people misusing them. I noticed it with wget. The version I downloaded would die on an access violation if I used -np and -L. Which is legal as far as I can see, but the latest build crashes with that command line.

Now since it's free and open source, I just fiddled with the batch file that called it to work in a different way. But if it was commercial and as widely used as Windows that break would trigger an avalanche of tech support calls.

The economics are different in commercial software - you're better off offering a limit set of options and making sure you test every combination of them on the few supported platforms. With open source anyone can add an option, anyone can introduce a bug and anyone can fix it.

In fact I think Microsoft sit in the middle of scale of customizability - somewhere between Linux which is highly customizable and Mac which is almost totally locked down. They do offer embedded versions of desktop OSs incidentally which are more modular and customizable. But those are sold to engineers in very small volumes, and presumably have more expensive support contracts.

Submitter shows their ignorance. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208680)

You aren't going to lower the actual footprint of Windows by a measurable amount when you do this. You may THINK you will because you remove 20mb of drivers and other components you've never heard of, so you don't think you need. The only problem is, when one of the programs does use those (and they don't always spell it out), you're very screwed, as many developers don't even bother to check failure conditions on 'built-in' OS components. It isn't like you can magically add it in an easy way at a later date, either. For all the time that you waste "slimming" Windows down, you could get a real job and make enough money to get yourself more RAM or a better processor.

Also, comparing a full operating system to an R&D kernel (MinWin) only shows the submitter's ignorance. Let's see, one of them is designed to run a bazillion different programs with a graphical user interface, while the other is a kernel that runs a web server. I'd love to know exactly what made the submitter think this is a logical comparison.

Now microsoft can prove it (4, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208694)

Microsoft alway said Vista wasn't fat, it was just big-boned. Now they can prove it!

Windows 95, better times? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22208716)

Anyone remember back in the win95 era when you could choose whether to install "extra" components rather than having them pushed down your throat ? =)

MinWin Minix? (1)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208730)

MinWin's name suggests it may be a clone, or a similar OS to, Minix. It may just be because it's 'mini', but I'd like to think they're actually rewriting Windows, starting with the kernel.

You know what's smaller on an order of magnitude? (1)

imyy4u1 (1222436) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208800)

Microsoft's sales of Vista vs. their sales of XP. Remember the hype when Windows 95 came out, and the hype when Windows 98 came out? It was HUGE! And then when 2000 and XP came out, the hype was a little less, but still there. As for Vista, noone knew the release date and noone cared. And tons of people are refusing to switch over, and I don't blame them. I mean...why? What does Vista have that XP doesn't? What new stuff can Vista do, or what existing stuff can it do better? ...... Exactly! And, on the verge of being inappropriate, I think Bill Gates' penis is an order of magnitude smaller than a fruitfly.

MinWin? What's next? (2, Insightful)

filbranden (1168407) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208878)

First, they said that 95 was buggy and that 98 fixed them. Then, 98 was too unstable and XP was rock solid. Last year, XP was too old and Vista was new and shiny. Now, Vista is bloated and MinWin is lean.

Could perhaps Microsoft decide if their products are good or bad?

Non Essential Windows Vista component...??? (1)

scafuz (985517) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208944)

.....??? wasn't the long time available format C: enough???!

Who cares about 15GByte? (1, Interesting)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 6 years ago | (#22208952)

Really, there are two scenarios for getting Vista:
a) New PC. Has at least 400Gbyte HD (ok, maybe 120 if its a laptop). 15Gbyte is a very minor fraction.
Windows 3.1 used a larger part of the 120Mbyte HD my first PC had.

b) You buy it, and pay $$$ for it: 15Gbyte right now is the equivalent of 3 bucks. Thats about 1% of what you payed for the OS. Neglectable.

I rather have the convinience of never having to touch the install medium again, _and_ shadow copies of system files, ect, than having a 99.5% instead of 98.5% empty hd.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>