Vista?

[~Void~]

You Vista users out there (I know there's a lot of you!) do you like it?

 

[UchihaSasuke.gr]

I installed Vista for a day.Interface is amazing but has lots of bugs.One is when i changed tabs on internet the tab showed a ''flash'' of the previous' tag image and it hurt my eyes.Then i changed them..

 

[brad.dude03]

VISTA IS A GOD FORSAKEN SHITSTORM.

Install at own peril, could wreck everything you hold dear.

I installed it for about 2 hours, found its lack of anything working disturbing, and promptly put XP back in.

Until SP1 comes out, don't even bother. It sucks horribly. It could turn at like Windows Millenium Edition, where it's so bad that they stop supporting it a few months after it comes out and begin working on a new operating system...

 

[GST_Nemisis]

theres this guy who comes in from microsoft where i work and he claims there is a service update coming out for xp and vista which will make xp 15% faster and vista ALOT less buggy

good news

 

[ZypherXII]

I don't have anything particular against microsoft products or windows in general. But I really don't like Vista! Its a like XP with a new interface and even more bugs. Requiring lots of resources from your computer that is not necessary. I cannot imagine how it took Microsoft 6 years to develop Vista.

As for now I will stick with XP

 

[~Void~]

VISTA IS A GOD FORSAKEN SHITSTORM.

Install at own peril, could wreck everything you hold dear.

I installed it for about 2 hours, found its lack of anything working disturbing, and promptly put XP back in.

Until SP1 comes out, don't even bother. It sucks horribly. It could turn at like Windows Millenium Edition, where it's so bad that they stop supporting it a few months after it comes out and begin working on a new operating system...

Why? I'm enjoying Vista a lot, it's running very smoothly on my computer. No bugs yet.

 

[brad.dude03]

It's god-awful. Games take a 30% performance hit, and it's still not compatible with so many things. And forget getting homebrew or opensource apps to work that haven't yet recoded for Vista support...

 

[Samuraid]

Vista is visually pretty and has some nice smaller features that make life a bit easier. However, the fact that it will easily use 1GB of RAM for a default install and has sub-par gaming performance is enough to keep me from using it.

 

[brad.dude03]

The bloatware is also a megaproblem, and a result of the memory-usage problem. For Vista, Microsoft thought they'd be smart and copy Mac (Hell, look at the design). So, everyone knows that for the most part, the software that comes with Macs lets you do just about anything, and well. This pre-packaged software is a really great enhancement for Macs, because that's one less thing people have to go out and buy from someone else.

Now, Vista tried to do this, but they failed. All of the pre-packaged software built into Vista is TERRIFYINGLY bad, and it ends up like bloatware, bad pre-boxed software that usually comes with prebuilt systems that you buy from bigbox stores. The problem is, unlike normal bloatware, this stuff is built right into the operating system, so you can't just uninstall it.

So now, people have all of these junky programs running, hogging a lot of memory. Great. So, they go out and buy all new programs that work better. So now, not only do they have all of this garbage bloatware running, but also their third-party programs to make up for the crappy ones Microsoft included!

And that's how Microsoft went wrong.

 

[TDR]

xp works well for me and I see no reason to change it (maybe get the 64-bit version sometime soon). I've seen and used Vista and it doesn't seem like a big change to me.
Also, I suck big time at computers and stuff, so I'd probably disintegrate my computer while trying to figure out how to install a new operating system and stuff...

 

[brad.dude03]

TDR, I'd be cautious over 64-Bit Windows. There's a reason it isn't the standard yet, though it undoubtably will be eventually. Many hardware and software issues with compatiblity and such.

And installing a new OS is as easy as putting the disc in and following the instructions as you go along.

 

[GST_Nemisis]

perhaps yoiu should dual boot and see if you have any compatability issues

 

[TDR]

TDR, I'd be cautious over 64-Bit Windows. There's a reason it isn't the standard yet, though it undoubtably will be eventually. Many hardware and software issues with compatiblity and such.

eh...well I'd better not touch it then

 

[brad.dude03]

Probably not, as it's not worth the trouble, not yet anyway.

 

[I)eath2u4me]

i hate vista soooo much. if i had vista, id throw my comp out and get a Mac. Vista requires f*cking TWICE the amount of everything (RAM, Memory, CPU Speed, ect.) just to run video games.
Ex.: CnC3 Requires 521 MB RAM
On Vista, it would require 1024MB RAM

Theres many other problems about vista, but i have little time to list them all.
(Psst, even windows 98 is better than Vista)

 

[~Void~]

sub-par gaming performance

WTF? On my XP computer, I could play TES Oblivion on medium settings, with minimal mods, and it would lag a bit. On this new awesome Vista computer, I can play it on Ultra-High graphics and resolution, with over 220 mods (lots of mods ), and have an average FPS of 70-100.
Maybe the graphics card plays a bit into that, but the amount of RAM it uses? Meh, 200mb. On my XP it used 600.

 

[TDR]

excuse me for going a bit off topic, but I run oblivion on 640x480 with average settings and it still lags like hell in forests, cities and when there are more than 2 things attacking me...and I have 2GB ram and ati x800gto 256MB. It's not an awesome configuration but as far as I know it should run Oblivion way better than it does in my case.

 

[Samuraid]

That's likely your problem right there:

x800gto 256MB

The X800's don't even support shader model 3.0 and they are not exceptionally fast, at least not compared with the latest cards out there.

 

[brad.dude03]

WTF? On my XP computer, I could play TES Oblivion on medium settings, with minimal mods, and it would lag a bit. On this new awesome Vista computer, I can play it on Ultra-High graphics and resolution, with over 220 mods (lots of mods ), and have an average FPS of 70-100.
Maybe the graphics card plays a bit into that, but the amount of RAM it uses? Meh, 200mb. On my XP it used 600.

Eh.... dude, you'd probably be getting 150 fps if you were running this rig with XP.

 

[ZypherXII]

yup, brad is right.. get this monster up and running with XP..

EDIT: Just remembered watching this video on Chris Pirillo's blog: Windows Vista vs. Windows XP

 

[GST_Nemisis]

yeh but having 150fps on a screen that refreshes at 28ms is a bit pointless.

 

[brad.dude03]

Well, then having a solid kickass framerate during the most intensive scenes in the game.

 

[GST_Nemisis]

lol, thats more like it!

 

[brad.dude03]

Exactly. So it pays to use XP.

 

[GST_Nemisis]

vista can be summerised as a good idea, poorley executed; however i do have good hopes for the future, believe it or not, i do have alot of faith in microsoft.

 

[brad.dude03]

Well they haven't gone this far for nothing. If SP1 turns that OS around there may be hope yet.

 

[ZypherXII]

Well they haven't gone this far for nothing. If SP1 turns that OS around there may be hope yet.

As far as I am concerned then SP1 is not going to do anything groundbraking to Vista. A new service pack release is not going to cut it for me. They screwed up to begin with.

 

[brad.dude03]

I know, but perhaps some bug fixes may at least make it useable...

Iy'll still be a resource hog, though,. because they'll never remove their bloatware.

 

[GST_Nemisis]

with computers becoming more and more powerful, resource management isnt really a concern of mine. i can afford to componenets needed to run vista without a hitch, however, compatability and bugs is an isue of mine. hopefully, if sp1 adresses this, i may consider vista.

 

[LiOneSS]

Vista=tech shit, i had it and i reinstalled good ol' XP

 

[I)eath2u4me]

Okay, Vista truely sucks, and it always has. Just admit (you Vista users) that Vista does infact, suck. As soon as they fix it up, and make faster insted of slower, and making its programs require twice the RAM, Memoery, Processor speeds, ect., I will get Vista. As for now, I will stay "Upgraded" to Windows XP SP2.

 

[Eleandor]

Vista fails as an operating system, simply because it's not doing what it's supposed to do.
Graphical enhancements that consume performance is NOT the way to go for an operating system. I actually use the "2000" look on XP because all those colors and special effects such as fading out aren't useful to me, in fact they're horrible. If you don't look at the graphics, you see a buggy OS. Is that what an OS should be like? I don't think so...

Oh... and is it true that you can't remove .exe's when you're in vista? I heard it from someone, and if it's true, it really sucks...

 

[Kuhneghetz]

Windows Vista is the incarnation of evil (in a horrible way).

 

[brad.dude03]

Generally incarnations of evil are pretty horrible

 

[I)eath2u4me]

I agree 100% with Eleandor...

5 posts to go!

 

[Samuraid]

So, the next question remains:
Will Windows 7 be better or worse than Vista? If Microsoft holds to their release schedule, we'll know for sure by the second half of 2009.

 

[donut3.5]

*beats heat against desk*
Why can't stupid Microsoft fix their operating systems before moving onto another horribly buggy one?
--donut3.5--

 

[Gilles]

From what I heard form a "computer person" (I'm not all that computer savy) the problem with Windows is that they just continue to build on what they have. Mac cleaned the slate with OSX. They started from scratch to build a good OS. Microsoft just adds more to the base they have, causing problems.

Tell me if I'm wrong. I have no idea, this is one account I heard.

 

[brad.dude03]

Yes, the NT system has been in use for many a year now, so the core itself is getting stale, but I can live with that. XP uses the NT core and it's sufficient, if not at all that great. And Microsoft did the same as Mac, Windows 95 and 98 were both based from Windows 1.0. So was Millenium Edition, and it was this horrendous piece of work that most likely caused Microsoft to develop all of their new operating systems (From 2000 and on) from NT.

And anyway, look at the whole Me 2000 deal. Windows released 98. Computer users praised the lord. Then ME came out. It was a disaster. So Microsoft followed up with 2000, which is probably the best Windows release to date.

Good things can come after horrible failures, as 2000 proved. If Vista turns out to be another ME, then we can hope that Microsoft will learn from their mistakes and create a better follow-up.

 

[GST_Nemisis]

i personally think the NT base system is a very effective one. its cleary very versitile and has now become a standard in way of support and compatability. XP is a solid OS now and with a new service pack on the go i dont think anyone can really knock it.

 

[brad.dude03]

It's not the base itself that's the problem, it's all of the security flaws, lock-ups, BSOD's, and other random problems. Overall, it's pretty stable, but it certainly has its fair share of problems. Far better than Vista though.

 

[Dr Super Good]

VISTA has major preformance BOOSTS (yes boosts) with modern videogames like TES oblivion if you have 4 GB of RAM (No lack of RAM) and modern hardware. Vista utalizeses multi cores better than XP thus overall they run more efficently with less wastage. Also Vista enables DX10 for graphics, which boosts FPS (again with modern hardware).

Old games like WC3 will run better on XP until atleast SP1. More modern multi core supporting games like supreme commanders are said to run better on vista with best hardware (or atleast as well). Like I said, the major problem is backward compatability, they really have to fix that as modern games on modern systems run fine on vista.

Or atleast that is what thousands of people have been saying.

 

[brad.dude03]

No games run better on Vista. Both PC Gamer and PC Magazine have reported a 30% loss in performance (both in numbers and noticable on screen) between games played on XP and Vista. This goes from 90's games to the latest releases. They're not making this stuff up, and neither am I.

Dx10 doesn't boost frames at all. In fact, DX9 hardware still gets way more fps than DX10, even when the DX10 hardware is running a game in DX9.

 

[Xarwin]

My laptop + Vista =

CRASH & CRASH & CRASH = CRASH² X CRASH³ = CRASH ON!

The interface is good, but it is just full of bugs and uses too much of the CPU IMO.

 

[~Void~]

Oh... and is it true that you can't remove .exe's when you're in vista? I heard it from someone, and if it's true, it really sucks...

No, that is wrong xD
Only annoying things for me so far are the security notices >_>

The interface is good, but it is just full of bugs and uses too much of the CPU IMO.

That's why I got a new computer instead of upgrading. IMO, upgrading an old computer is stupid because the old computer wasn't meant to handle the new system.

 

[Eleandor]

Getting a new computer doesn't mean vista requires less cpu usage. It'll just be less noticeable as you (hopefully) have a better cpu. Still, it's using too much memory for things that aren't essentially necessary for an operating system.

 

[Kofi_Banan]

It was predictable that Vista will have many bugs. Im not considering to install it untill SP1 will come. So far im happy with XP.

 

[ZypherXII]

I'm not planning to install at all ..

Every OS has bugs.. It's just that Vista has quite to many for me.

 

[TheSandWraith]

I think Vista gets a lot of crap. I personally don't own a computer with Vista, but my friend has 2 computers with it, and he says he likes it a lot. He told me that he hasn't had a lot of compatibility issues and says it also uses its resources a heck of a lot better than XP. I have used the computers with Vista on them and have found nothing to be wrong with it. I think people just give it a bad rap because Microsoft sucked it up with ME and XP, but things are looking up.
As for bugs and such, I am sure it has them, but that happens with all new OS's so why fret? They invented updates and patches for a reason: To correct problems that they might have never found without the help of the public.

 

[brad.dude03]

Your friend is wrong. I'm sorry, but I've been using XP for almost 7 years now, and having 2 laptops that use Vista (neither belong to me, thankfully, but I still have to use them ocassionally) I can tell you 100% truthfully that Vista HOGS resources hardcore. My laptops both have 2 GB of RAM in them, and after logging in it takes a good 45 seconds before I can even do anything, and a full minute and a half before its finished booting. This PC, albeit using 4 GB of RAM, boots up in less than 30 seconds on XP, from cold-boot to desktop. My third laptop, in pieces now, booted XP in a minute (cold-boot to desktop) and it was using 2002 hardware, and had 1 gb of RAM.

Vista is basically unusable with less than 2 Gb of RAM, and even 2 only makes it just bearable. Vista can never run as fast as XP, even with 4 Gb of RAM running Vista only 3.25 can be picked up at the maximum (due to the 32 Bit Architecuter), so the only theoretical way of getting Vista to be blazing fast is having a rediculously expensive processor (Laptops are both running Centrino Duo at 2 GHZ) and using the 64-Bit architecture, which is even more buggy and incompatible than its 32 Bit counterpart.

And the reason everyone was chiefly throwing shit at Microsoft is because they promised a completely different operating system with Longhorn. Longhorn had people excited, and after the success of XP, people began to think that Microsoft finally had got its shit together.

Alas, Longhorn turned into Vista and the final version was basically XP with a new interface, a whole assload of bugs, and a bunch of bloatware included in the OS that both took up massive amounts of space (Vista takes up 15 GB to install) and slows the PC it runs on right down to a crawl.

And patching can't save Vista. Millenium Edition was the successor to Windows 98. Microsoft was fully expecting it to be the new industry standard, shipped in every PC on the planet, etc, etc. When it came out, the end of the world nearly came about. Microsoft was in hot water, so they completely abandoned ME and worked on developing two new OS's that would replace ME. They basically slid ME under the rug and poured 5 tons of concrete overtop, pretending that it didn't exist.

The same seems likely for Vista. They promised too much, and even if they do get some of the compatibility issues worked out, people will still be clamouring for a successor. Vista, with 100% compatibility is still on par or worse off than XP, which has better performance (in gaming and everyday tasks) and security that is about the same. Some revolution.

To put it simply, there is no reason to switch from XP to Vista. It has no selling point. Try and give me one reason why I should switch from XP to Vista, and i'll gladly take you up on it.

XP got its support life extended. I'm pretty sure MS would stop supporting XP this year, but it's been renewed into 2010, if I recall correctly. Either way, MS is responding to the outcry over Vista's suckiness, and they are well aware that they're in deep shit right now.

The final kicker is this: When one of these two things happens, you can rest easy knowing that Vista is completely dead.

1) Computer manufactures such as Dell, HP, Acer, Toshiba, etc, begin to offer either brand new PC's running solely XP, or the option to have Vista or XP preinstalled on the system.

2) Windows 9 comes out Holiday 2008.