For whatever reason this week, I’ve take a bit of an interest in IPv6. For all your non-techies out there, this likely won’t mean all that much, so you’ll just have to bear with me. I hate to put two tech articles back to back but this is just the way it will be…

Now before I begin, I want to make one thing perfectly clear, I am NOT an expert on this matter and just because I say something, that doesn’t mean that it’s true. Granted I have studied a good number of hours this week on the matter, but that still does not make me an expert.

Let start with the basics, IPv4 (the current IP scheme) uses 4 blocks of 3 numbers each, separated by a period. An example of this would be 192.168.125.241. IPv6 however uses 8 blocks of 4 HEXADECIMAL characters each separated by a colon. And example of this would be 3ffe:1900:4545:0003:0200:f8ff:fe21:67cf. Now I have a hard enough time remembering an IPv4 address….how in the world could I be expected to memorize something like that?!?!

Now the reason for trying to move to IPv6 is quite obvious, MANY more addresses. The problem with this, however, is that IPv6 is NOT backwards compatible with IPv4. So in order for this change to occur, all the computers in the world need to switch over to IPv6 at roughly the same time. And for those that argue that they can run both, one along side another, the cost to do so is quite high. And sure, there are a number of sites that have started to do that, but is everyone really going to follow suit? I’ll let you make your own call on that one….

The final point that I want to make here, is that yes, at SOME point we are going to run out of IPv4 addresses, I’m just not convinced that IPv6 is really the answer here. I mean, it’s COMPLETELY different and for the most part, NOT backwards compatible. Backwards compatibility has been the backbone of technological growth in the past, and more then likely will continue to be in the future. By making things backwards compatible, you give time for people to transition over to the new technology. You can’t possibly expect them all to switch all at once….. And I will admit, backwards compatibility has caused problems in the past, but it’s something that MUST be included as we push forward technologically….

I would invite anyone to do their own research into this. Google’s always a good place to start. 

Being the techie guy that I am, it’s only logical that there are some, more technical rants on here. Vista seemed to be the logical place to start, seeing as though there is still lots of talk about it, some good, and some bad.

Where to begin…..I guess we will start with what I do like about Vista since it’s a very short list:
1. It looks pretty.
2. It has lots of drivers.
3. It has DirectX 10.
That’s about all….

Now, onto the rant. Some of you may remember the previous Microsoft disaster of an OS know as Windows ME. Windows ME will forever go down in history for the most unstable OS ever created. It attempted to maintain support for Windows 3.1 hardware and software while still providing the latest technology. The result was, to say the least, a disaster.

Windows Vista takes this concept to a whole new level. The only thing that Vista does better then ME, is stay running.
For starters, Vista requires more resources then any other system I’ve ever seen. The amount of RAM required just to keep Vista running is more then what came standard in many computers just a few short years ago. And if you want to actually run programs along with Vista, you need much, much more. The install size is also extremely large requiring that you install from a DVD. This bloats the size of Windows out to somewhere around 20GB, well beyond the 7GB used by XP.

While Vista has made everything “look” good, almost everything is actually HARDER to do. For instance, to get to a simple “run” dialog, you have to dig very deeply into the start menu to be able to find it. Vista also floods the user with endless yes/no permission questions and security warnings making even the savviest of computer users’ head spin. Microsoft has also managed to take anything in the way of useful features and options and hide them deep into the “new and improved” control panel. Those that have been using a Windows-based computer will find Vista very hard to navigate and even harder to actually do anything with.

Vista’s bloated OS is farther “complimented” by its lack of support for a large number of both software and hardware products. Many users have found that devices they bought even a year ago fail to work properly (or not at all) with Vista. Also a large number of software products either fail to install at all, or simply don’t run right. Vista also takes a painfully long time to both start up, and shut down. This has prompted Microsoft to, instead of actually fixing the problem, make the “power” button on the start menu to actually put the computer to sleep giving the illusion that it’s actually starting up and shutting down faster.

And if all the still isn’t enough to make you believe that a terrible product Vista is, consider this finial observation. Windows XP was originally slated to reach End Of Life (EOL) here at the end of 2007. This means no more XP systems would be sold after this point. Due to the problems with Vista, Microsoft has pushed the EOL of XP out until the end of 2008!!!

Vista is a poorly designed, poorly implemented, overpriced, unusable operating system to date. I can’t possible believe how Microsoft could charge $400 dollars for it….