Vista... sucks

[Rob Williams]

I think by now everyone is well aware that I despise Microsoft's latest OS, but this morning I added a new reason to the pile. Last night I set up the machine for benchmarking, which required installing XP, Vista and then Fedora. All went well. I configured each OS before shutting down for the night, installing all applications and also disabling each OS' internet capabilities.

Whenever I install Vista for benchmarking, I don't put in a serial key, rather just install without it, which gives 30 days of access to the OS. Well, not using a product key and disabling the internet prior to shutting down was a bad, bad idea. I noticed that the date in the BIOS was off by a month, so I changed it back to July. On the next Vista boot, I received a "You must activate Windows to continue".

That's bad enough, because I've already used a couple different serial keys I have, and don't feel like calling Microsoft to get them fixed. Even if I wanted to activate though, I couldn't... because I disabled my internet earlier. Because of that simple fact, as a normal consumer, I would have been completely SOL. You have the option to set up a new internet connection, but what if you don't have a new one to set up? For whatever reason, at this point of the activation process, Vista disables the "Network and Sharing". If it allowed that screen, I would have been able to re-enable the network device.

You could say I am a tad disgruntled at it, since I have to re-install Vista and then re-write the GRUB boot loader. Pain in the ass.

[NicePants42]

I definitely don't want to defend MS here, because I've never used Vista, but I have called customer support a number of times when re-installing XP Pro.

I've done at least half a dozen re-installs of XP Pro, and after the 2nd or 3rd time I called MS CS explaining that I was upgrading/whatever, I was later able to reinstall without having to call anyone (like, they gave me X more installations).

From my experience with XP customer support, if you have good serial numbers and are just messing around with different configurations of the same PC (and not installing Vista on ~17 machines that are all in use) you shouldn't have a problem getting the OS activated...Unless Vista can't be activated over the phone.

All I'm trying to say is that it might be easier to call MS than to reinstall everything again, or whatever else you have to do.

Also, Vista SP1 is nearing public beta. (http://www.dailytech.com/Microsoft+Readying+Vista+SP1+Beta+for+midJuly/article7965.htm) Heh, I notice you changed the link highlights. Nice. :D

[Rob Williams]

I think it's bullshit that you have to call up customer service for a product you legally own, irregardless of what you are doing with it. You paid for it, so what if you redo the PC? Why should you have to call up and wait on a line to get it fixed again? This brings me back to the rule where legal buyers are the ones inconvenienced... not the ones downloading Vista off a torrent site.

"All I'm trying to say is that it might be easier to call MS than to reinstall everything again, or whatever else you have to do."

This is still impossible, since the Network and Sharing was disabled, so I was unable to re-enable the device. As far as I know, even with customer service, you cannot activate offline, unless there is some secret key combination you need to press that they tell you about on the phone.

In the end, the best thing that Microsoft could do (which still wouldn't help me here) would be to allow the user to deactivate their copy of Windows, before re-installing or moving to another PC. I have various programs here that let you do that, such as Photoshop. Deactivate, and you will be good to roll.

[b1lk1]

YArrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!! XP Pro Corporate rules. I love never ever calling for activation or even needing it. I do agree. It should be able to be de-activated so you can reinstall without a problem. Considering you can easily activate XP on an unlimited amount of PC's if you were untruthful to the operators, it would be an excellent way to stop that.

[MacMan]

Yes, believe it or not, there is one good thing about Vista's activation process and it's simple: Linux and OS X! Neither one of these great alternatives require any activation codes what-so-ever, or the hell that goes with them.

Of course, some people are forced to use Vista, XP, etc., like editors-in-chiefs, etc., but with each and every passing day the reasons for continuing to use Windows for the rest of us is growing less and less important. Yes, PC's have their games but with dedicated video consoles even that is not the issue it used to be.

Not only that, but OS X without the activation hell is only a fraction of the cost and Linux is free, so why people put up with Vista or XP, I will never know?

[DarkSynergy]

I would say that this is more of a Microsoft issue than a specific Vista issue. They are quite strict in their licensing rules. It's one of those things that comes with the territory. Most people don't experience this because most people don't reinstall their OS as frequently as people like us.

B1lk1, you are exactly right. The corporate edition of XP Pro is so very beautiful. I got a copy from the campus book store and have since slip streamed SP2 into the install. It's wonderful to not have to activate Windows each and every time I reinstall the OS.

[DarkSynergy]

Yes, believe it or not, there is one good thing about Vista's activation process and it's simple: Linux and OS X! Neither one of these great alternatives require any activation codes what-so-ever, or the hell that goes with them.

Of course, some people are forced to use Vista, XP, etc., like editors-in-chiefs, etc., but with each and every passing day the reasons for continuing to use Windows for the rest of us is growing less and less important. Yes, PC's have their games but with dedicated video consoles even that is not the issue it used to be.

Not only that, but OS X without the activation hell is only a fraction of the cost and Linux is free, so why people put up with Vista or XP, I will never know?


The problem is that Windows has been around since the dawn of the GUI. Everyone and their brother have used Windows at one point in time if they have ever been on a PC. And also, most people are afraid of change. It's why Intel still rules the desktop CPU market (rumors of shady business practices aside) and why Microsoft absolutely owns the market share of operation systems (similar rumors surround MS as well). As bad as everyone says Vista is, its not terrible. It's actually decent operating system but Microsoft got a bit carried away in it's attempt to protect us from ourselves. I hope that the flaws in Vista open Microsoft's eyes and force them to not release a shitty OS. I hope the learn from this and bust ass on the next OS that they will inevitably release... or they might just continue to be the Microsoft that got a little bit to confident in their lack or credible competition.

[ccdarkness]

I once installed vista, right after it has been released.... after 2 or 3 weeks i've put XP Pro back... maybe when Vista SP2 will be available i will try again ;)

[moon111]

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q94/Pilldaddy/20070331.jpg

[DarkSynergy]

While I really don't hate Vista like the rest of you guys, the comic is pretty damned funny and accurate... metaphorically.

[Merlin]

I got the Beta2 back when it was offered and yes, it did suk.
I got the OEM Vista Ultimate for 109.00 USD for the latest system build a few months ago.
At first the drivers conficted witht the new OS, then companies started coming out with corrected drivers.
Some programs needed no updating like Photoshop and games ( HL2 Deathmatch ) and ( BF2142 ).
I think it's like all new operating systems, they release too soon to get it out there.But everything is running smooth now.
I also flashed the M2N32 board to the latest ( 107.0 bios ).
Even NVidia came out with Vista drivers that worked great.
All in all it should be a great OS

Merlin

[NicePants42]

So I had my first run-in with Vista last weekend.

I have two siblings who are off to college, so the family got them each a laptop that had Vista Home Premium installed.

While I was there, I attempted to transfer some files from my sister's desktop to her laptop - since her desktop had apparently not been functioning for some time (unreadable boot volume error) I figured that the easiest way to get at the files would be to load up the desktop HDD in an external enclosure and plug it into the laptop.

Long story short, Vista's security would not let me copy the files, which mainly consisted of a bunch of word documents (school work). I tried several solutions which I looked up online (UAC enabled, disabled, command line takeown, etc.) with no success.

Needless to say that I am not impressed with Vista.

[Rob Williams]

Not being able to copy files off of the drive is really odd... is there a chance that the files were 'protected' in Windows XP through her user account? Or, do you happen to remember what the error was?

[NicePants42]

The original error was caused by a bad sector on the OS partition that prevented the OS from loading during boot-up.

The error I got when trying to copy the files was very general, like, 'unable to perform this operation' kind of general. I have no idea what XP protections she would've had going.

[Rob Williams]

Welcome to the Vista-hatin' team. Glad to have you on board.

[DarkSynergy]

I have been testing Vista since before it was released in January here at work. I have defended it quite a bit in talks online and on the phone with Rob but I will not do so anymore. I officially reinstalled XP on my work notebook and will not be "upgrading" to Vista again anytime soon.

Once the "OMFG this is pretty" wears off, your stuck with a unresponsive, slow operating system. Running Vista is like taking a high hard one without being bought a drink.

Good riddance.

[b1lk1]

I just hope that SP3 for XP is meaningful, not that I can find many flaws that I consider needing overt attention. No plans on Vista-tizing my PC any time soon if ever....

[barone]

Vista takes more memory up when its idling haha.

[b1lk1]

If you ask me, the biggest problem with Vista is that it is all about the GUI and not about the actual OS. That pretty GUI it has is eating memory and making video cards work when only displaying a desktop. It even causes your PC to consume more electricity. I for one still firmly believe everything Vista has to offer should have been put in a service pack to upgrade XP, even if there was a one time charge for it. It is a cash grab by M$ and I hope it truely backfires in their face. XP works well and should not be EOL no matter how "old" it is.

[UnderRAPS]

The original error was caused by a bad sector on the OS partition that prevented the OS from loading during boot-up.

The error I got when trying to copy the files was very general, like, 'unable to perform this operation' kind of general. I have no idea what XP protections she would've had going.

I am a PC tech for Staples and I ran into the same thing on my official tech bench machine (loaded with VISTA?!?!). I was able to access any XP file but only after taking ownership of each file...INDIVIDUALLY!!! I know there must be some way around it but I bugged my manager enough to let me install XP Pro on the tech bench. Belkin sells a XP to Vista USB cable to transfer files...if ya wanna go that route.

[Rob Williams]

I've never been so high off of hatred before.

[Tech-Daddy]

I aint touchin it... no way...

I'll keep my XP rolling here. Perfectly happy!

[Merlin]

I've had Vista Ultimate running here for quite a while now...still no problems.
I'm wondering why everyone else is having problems !

Merlin

[b1lk1]

I just learned how to dual boot Linux Ubuntu and XP so there's no need, want or desire here for Vista. All I need is XP for games, and since I am sporting all DX9 hardware, that really means there's no need for Vista for me.

[UnderRAPS]

b1lk1, I am running the same setup. No need for MS shit at all. Well, cept to play games but I'll be getting a console soon.

[Rob Williams]

From our news: I've been accused of being a Vista-basher in the past, many times. I agree, sometimes I rant and rave about how much I dislike the new OS way too much. But it's too difficult to keep my mouth shut when many other people are doing the same thing. The latest 'victim'? Jim Louderback joined PC Magazine in 2002 as Editor in Chief and has just stepped down because of his distaste for Vista.

He mentions, "So why, nine months after launch, am I so frustrated? The litany of what doesn't work and what still frustrates me stretches on endlessly." I agree. Vista has been out since the beginning of the year, and when I go to install it, it is STILL as buggy as it was last year when I first installed the RTM. Microsoft doesn't seem to be pushing too hard to have things fixed, or pushing for anything it seems. Nine months later, and Ultimate owners still have nothing to show in way of 'Extras'. I want to like Vista... I just wish Microsoft would give me a reason to.
<table align="center"><tbody><tr><td>http://techgage.com/images/news/windows_vista_large_news_logo_killer_of_dreams.jpg</td></tr></tbody></table>I could go on and on about the lack of drivers, the bizarre wake-up rituals, the strange and nonreproducible system quirks, and more. But I won't bore you with the details. The upshot is that even after nine months, Vista just ain't cutting it. I definitely gave Microsoft too much of a free pass on this operating system: I expected it to get the kinks worked out more quickly. Boy, was I fooled! If Microsoft can't get Vista working, I might just do the unthinkable: I might move to Linux.

Source: PC Magazine (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2171472,00.asp)

[GeekGirl]

Windows Vista: the new ME


http://www.renegadeguild.net/other/VistaME.jpg

[b1lk1]

But really, tell us how you guys feel! LOL!!!!!!!

[Merlin]

Yeah, They keep beating around in the bush about it.
Personally, I don't have any problems with Vista.
But then I did a clean install on a new drive

The one thing I hate, there is an update for something every day.

But, All the drivers are fine and I tried an OC at 10% and FSB at 475. It was all stable at 3019 MHz and the temps were around 38C
I guess I got lucky at something finally with Vista.

Merlin

[b1lk1]

What version do you use? The main reason I am not very willing to go to Vista is that their 64-bit support is slow, although much better than XP-64bit. I see no logical reason to buy another 32-bit OS since XP works so well and DX10 is still a ghost.

[Rob Williams]

I only rant about Vista because I've had issues with it on every single computer I've used it on... including brand-new laptops. I just find it absolutely foolish that so many issues can occur from simple tasks.

[moon111]

Can always count on a Vista dig at Techgage. :) I've lost all desire to even try the OS now.

[UnderRAPS]

Some more articles to chew on regarding the Veeesta.

http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2007/08/more-raves-for-vista.html

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/07/biting_the_bullet_on_windows_v_1.php

All Hail exPeeeee!!!


Ooooo Oooooo one more k?

http://www.techworld.com/news/index.cfm?NewsID=9579

[moon111]

I recently heard the code for Vista is being called the longest suicide note in the history of mankind.

[madstork91]

I recently heard the code for Vista is being called the longest suicide note in the history of mankind.

lol.

Vista... sucks

Yes... yes it does.

[MacMan]

Walt Mosberg recently reported that, according to the Windows Vista index, the best machine he found for running Vista got a score of 5 out of 5.9.

And what was the only machine to get a score of 5 out of all of the hundreds of various machines tested?

Yes, you got it.... a 2.8 iMac, 24 incher!

The world gets stranger by the day!

http://www.mymac.cc/?p=269

[Rob Williams]

One, I have no doubts that Mossberg is being paid by Apple. He's said so many extraordinary things about them lately, it's hard to believe otherwise.

Second, I have no idea what the old man is testing, but I have never used a desktop PC that didn't achieve a score of lower than 5.0. My main machine scores 5.7 overall, held back by the hard-drive for some reason.

The mid-range laptop I have beside me scores 4.7, thanks to slower RAM and hard-drive.

[BentFez]

Gotta second that opinion... Walt must not have tested very many consumer Vista computers.

Whether or not he's on Apple's payroll, Uncle Walt is definitely biased: "But the score was very impressive for a computer that wasn’t designed with Vista in mind."

Because Vista requires changes in pc design? And the way he tries to make it seem that similar performance requires a "tricked out high end Dell or HP box" and thus more expensive hardware than his iMac is criminal.

Buy a Mac to run Vista, what rubbish. Buy the WSJ to line the bottom of your birdcage.

[GameMasterNick]

Well, not using a product key and disabling the internet prior to shutting down was a bad, bad idea. I noticed that the date in the BIOS was off by a month, so I changed it back to July. On the next Vista boot, I received a "You must activate Windows to continue".

I just realized that Rob figured out a way to get around the activation simply by backdating your BIOS. :eek: If it works forwards, think it would work backwards? Not that I'm going to buy Vista until I rebuild my box in 2 years or so.

[b1lk1]

I am running Vista. No problems at all. Easy install too. I get a 5.9 Vista Experience score too. You couldn't give me a free Mac to run anything.

[sbrehm72255]

I must have pulled Vista off of 5 or 6 low-end OEM's in the past few months because the customers totally hated it, all opted to go back to XP.........;) Works for me and earns me a little badly needed extra cash.

[Rob Williams]

While I was there, I attempted to transfer some files from my sister's desktop to her laptop - since her desktop had apparently not been functioning for some time (unreadable boot volume error) I figured that the easiest way to get at the files would be to load up the desktop HDD in an external enclosure and plug it into the laptop.

Long story short, Vista's security would not let me copy the files, which mainly consisted of a bunch of word documents (school work). I tried several solutions which I looked up online (UAC enabled, disabled, command line takeown, etc.) with no success.

I just ran into a similar problem here, but different symptoms. I have a Vantec NexStar 3 enclosure with a Toshiba 200GB 2.5" drive inside, and it connects via USB. I wanted to get a program off the drive yesterday for benchmarking (because due to a Vista crash, I had to reinstall it), and each time I plugged in the drive, I had a prompt asking me to scan and fix the volume.

I let it do it's thing, and it took forever, so I canceled it and tried to copy over the files anyway. As soon as I tried to copy the file I needed over, the folder I was in closed up and the drive started clicking. After multiple reboots, I was unable to get the file I needed.

So obviously I thought something was wrong with the drive and wanted to back up the drive fast. I hooked it up to my main Linux computer, copied all 180GB worth of data on there to my storage backup drive. The fact that I ran into no errors during such a large copy had me confused, since I couldn't copy a single file in Vista. Regardless, once the copy was done, I hooked up the drive via S-ATA to the Windows machine so that I could check it's SMART information and also scan the drive...

... and damn, not a single problem. The SMART was all "OK" and full-fledged disk-scans with HD Tune and Windows' built-in tool yielded no single error.

:confused:

[On_Wisconsin]

I am running Vista. No problems at all. Easy install too. I get a 5.9 Vista Experience score too. You couldn't give me a free Mac to run anything.

I think that's where the problem is...computers that could run XP decently (512 mb RAM, P4) won't handle as well as XP. XP's UI runs faster than Aero even on a good system...remove Aero and it's even "snappier" than XP.

No issues here, even on my underpowered lappy (1GB, P DC) works fine. Slow, but cheaper than buying a copy of XP. (But I do wish the world could run on Linux :D)

Heck, we all remember Windows ME, r?

[b1lk1]

I'll never understand this whole Windows ME hatred. I agree 110% that it was only Windows 98 with a new skin, but it worked fine on every PC I ever came across using it.

The main problem is Vista is that the demands are just too high for resources. I have a current test machine with an Intel Quad and 2GB of ram and Vista chugs along. But I know if I were to put 4GB in her, she's wake right up and make XP look silly.

[Rob Williams]

I'll never understand this whole Windows ME hatred. I agree 110% that it was only Windows 98 with a new skin, but it worked fine on every PC I ever came across using it.

Did you try more than zero PCs? ;-)

I ran into a problem with that OS on every PC I used it on. I remember the day I first installed it onto my own PC... I had a BSOD after the first reboot. It was with that, that I decided to go to Windows 2000 instead, which at the time, was far more stable.

ME was notorious for disconnecting people from the internet as well, especially with dial-up. I had to help out a few people with that bug alone. ME overall was just a very unfinished product.

On top of all that, isn't this the OS that crashed on stage while Gates was giving a presentation?

That aside, I need to retract the earlier comments about the external hard drive in Vista. As it turns out, it wasn't Vista, but rather the motherboard I am testing. It either has to do with the front USB port on the machine, or the USB header on the board itself... I'm going to find out. When I plugged the drive directly into the motherboard, the drive behaved itself.

[b1lk1]

I'm pretty certain EVERY version of Windows did that, LOL!!!!

All I can say is that I never had more problems with ME than I did with 98. As for 2000, it was a giant leap forward for M$, that's for sure. I am pretty sure it was Windows 98 that did that to Mr Gate$ though.

[Merlin]

I'll never understand this whole Windows ME hatred. I agree 110% that it was only Windows 98 with a new skin, but it worked fine on every PC I ever came across using it.

The main problem is Vista is that the demands are just too high for resources. I have a current test machine with an Intel Quad and 2GB of ram and Vista chugs along. But I know if I were to put 4GB in her, she's wake right up and make XP look silly.

Working in the field, when I see WinME I shutter. I know it's going to be a long day there.
The system just does not want to install different drivers, such as wireless cards-Wireless USB or most any other drivers.
Win98, I never had that problem.
Go figure....

[madstork91]

The prebuilts that were made with winME in mind didnt have that problem.

I had one. I didnt mind it. Xp was vastly better, and i was screwed.

Vista is far worse than ME in my exp with it.

[Merlin]

The prebuilts that were made with winME in mind didnt have that problem.

I had one. I didnt mind it. Xp was vastly better, and i was screwed.

Vista is far worse than ME in my exp with it.

I'm still trying to figure out why I'm not having any problems and others are.
I'm not promoting Vista...just using it on two computers now.
One was a fresh install on a new drive ( Computer below ).
And the other puter was an upgrade from WinXP home.
Now at first it was hard to find drivers for some things.
And another was Nero wouldn't even install, but Ashampoo would.
I read the Techgage article on the new NEro and got it, installed and works fine. I havent tried it on the upgraded machine.... I dont want to buy another copy just to test it. But it should work as well.

I do remember going from Win 3.5 to Win2000, I didn't like it at first, but later on I did. Then to Win XP.......it was a huge difference from Win200 to XP.
But I got over it after a while.

I guess if some people stated more what the problem was with Vista, maybe someone else has solved the problem and we could share the fix for all.

Merlin

[b1lk1]

I officially just had the most horrible experience ever with Vista. I set my AMD rig back up since the Intel machine is getting dedicated to some testing very soon. So I fired up Vista 64. It installed and worked flawlessly on this machine 2 other times. After 3 failed installs, I got it working @ 2 AM. Fired it up today, Explorer.exe kept freezing and nothing worked right at all. After 3 hours of fighting with it, I am back on XP.

[Rob Williams]

I had that same problem the other day... it's really strange you mention it. Coincidently, it was also with the 64-Bit version I was using. Re-installed three times, and each time, I'd receive Explorer.exe crash errors.

[b1lk1]

I was not convinced at all there were any issues with Vista since my last 10+ installs all went flawlessly. Last night was just pure hell. Having to reinstall yet again today with XP was just another headache I did not need. Oh well, atleast it's up and running!

[Rob Williams]

I hope it's not a constant problem with the 64-Bit version of Vista for some reason. That's the OS I chose to use in our upcoming GPU reviews.

[DarkSynergy]

B1lk1, welcome to the fold. We have t-shirts.

That said, I have been running Ultimate 32-bit on my notebook since CES and have yet to have a problem. I use it almost nightly to work on reviews and it's performed flawlessly. That doesn't make up for the countless problems I have had over the past year but its a start. RC1 SP1 has helped a bit it seems.

[b1lk1]

HAHA! I am just so surprised it gave me so much grief on a setup that I was sure it would run flawlessly. Of course, doing an install at midnight on a day which you feel like death warmed over isn't the best idea.

[Rob Williams]

That said, I have been running Ultimate 32-bit on my notebook since CES and have yet to have a problem.

This kind of thing frustrates me, because I without fail run into issues with Vista, no matter what I am using it on. If I build a computer and install it, I run into bizarre issues. If I receive a brand-new notebook to review, I run into bizarre issues. I have no idea how some people seem to avoid all of these issues I run into. I think more of it has to do with other people having a higher pain threshold than I do. Small issues piss me off, such as Windows Update refusing to work (a problem I tend to run into often).

HAHA! I am just so surprised it gave me so much grief on a setup that I was sure it would run flawlessly. Of course, doing an install at midnight on a day which you feel like death warmed over isn't the best idea.

Heh, installing an OS that late at night is a bad idea. It's so frustrating to run into show-stopping issues right before you plan to hit the sack.

[Merlin]

B1lk1, welcome to the fold. We have t-shirts.

That said, I have been running Ultimate 32-bit on my notebook since CES and have yet to have a problem. I use it almost nightly to work on reviews and it's performed flawlessly. That doesn't make up for the countless problems I have had over the past year but its a start. RC1 SP1 has helped a bit it seems.

I REALLY think a clean install makes the difference, a good formatted hard drive brand new.
That's what i did on this 150 gig raptor.
It's just every single day there is an update, usually a defender or junk email update......it doesnt require a restsrt, just always an update

Merlin
Oh, there's one now ( update )

[madstork91]

I had that same problem the other day... it's really strange you mention it. Coincidently, it was also with the 64-Bit version I was using. Re-installed three times, and each time, I'd receive Explorer.exe crash errors.

which blows even more because right now things are moving to 64 bit.

I just think its b.s. that it has to be a COMPLETELY formated and/or new hdd to work well.

I mean, really? Wtf?

WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE TAKING STEPS FORWARD WHEN WE UPGRADE SOMETHING! if I can do an install of xp on a drive that isnt BRAND NEW outta the box, why cant I with vista?

[b1lk1]

I don't know, if you ask me, we should be doing the full fresh format for any new OS. I was not having any luck with ANY OS on my PC and it came down to the fact my motherboard crapped out. Kinda weird the way it did, but oh well. Gave me a chance to try 64 bit XP and it is alot better than it used to be. Either way, I will use either Vista or XP 64 since I have 4GB in that machine and want to use it all. I will have a replacement mobo for it by mid week and will be happy. I am typing this on my fileserver which is a AMD Sempron LE1100 with DDR2 533 ram and a 13" CRT screen. Slow isn't the word for it and the screen really sucks to try to look at. Makes a killer filer server that cost me less than $400 complete, including 1TB of storage!

[Merlin]

I remember Win 3.5 with a whopping 1.6 gig hard drive and 6 mb's of ram....it was top of the line in 1994.
Then the operating system began to handle larger drives and mor ram.

Now we have a terabite set of hard drives and can go ( 64bit system ) to 8 and even 16 mbs of RAM

I have heard of a hard drive system using fluid ( in the works ) and NANO technology. so the big desktop systems we now have can be seen under a microscope in the future.
And even further back, a computer took up a whole roon, that same computerm now, can be placed into the palm of your hand.

The future....We shall see, We Shall See

Merlin