Why I still like Windows Vista more than Windows 7

[JaredFrost]

I liked vista.. but 7 is a clear upgrade.. so is 8 in technical terms... i'll wait to see 8.1 if the interface has improved as much as I've hoped.

 

Yeah, I liked Vista also, I had no issues with it, it worked great for me, I also see Windows 7 as an upgrade to Vista, while it functions the

same as Vista did for me, there are small minor updates that I like.

 

Now, that said, Windows 8 I don't like, I have Windows 8.1 preview on my Acer Tablet, and that's the only use I see for it, touchscreens

And even on there I find it annoying and clunky.

[Andre S. Veteran]

Why anyone would want to use a .BMP file for a wallpaper is beyond me though. It's such a hideous format in my mind. :laugh:

What's wrong with uncompressed image data? Apart from taking lots of unnecessary space :p

[fintechfooty]

erm, what?  Vista supports DX11.  Saints Row 4 supports DX10.  What's the problem, exactly?

 

What really? I couldn't install DX11 on my machine Vista x64 :/ So I had to install Windows 7. 

 

Now I feel like going back :/

[xendrome]

There is absolutely no reason to use Windows Vista when given the choice, when Windows 7 exists... That basically sums of this whole topic.

[Atomic Wanderer Chicken]

Windows Vista was beautiful and awesome in 2007, but not so much in 2013! I was using Vista recently for a few months and it was pretty good. I'd take Windows 7 over Vista any day. I'd take Windows 8 over 7 on the basis that its faster, but that's about it. Windows 7 and 8 are both good operating systems!

[Max Norris]

What really? I couldn't install DX11 on my machine Vista x64 :/

It was a bit late if I remember right (not positive, switched to 7 the day it was released) but yea, DX11 is available now, should come with the usual system updates, or KB971512 if you do it by hand. Just need to make sure SP2 is already installed.

[Ian W]

I was using Vista a couple days ago...until Saints Row IV asked me to install DXD11 :/

You must not have had the Platform Update (KB971512) installed. The Platform Update requires Service Pack 2 prior to installation.

[ViperAFK]

Vista does not deserve its bad reputation, it was a decent release and a massive improvement over XP. However I'd definitely not use it over win7.

[tomasarson]

I enjoyed Vista a ton after a service pack or two (Just like XP), but I would never go back to Vista over 7 or 8.  The speed or security improvements alone settle it for me.

[Ian W]

I enjoyed Vista a ton after a service pack or two (Just like XP), but I would never go back to Vista over 7 or 8.  The speed or security improvements alone settle it for me.

Isn't Windows 7 less secure by default?

[martin88]

There is absolutely no reason to use Windows Vista when given the choice, when Windows 7 exists... That basically sums of this whole topic.

Well, Vista is the most recent MS OS I'd use on a laptop/desktop*. After it goes EOL, I'd go with some Linux distro like Elementary OS. Or I could even buy an iMac or something on OS X.

*On a smartphone I like the latest Windows Phone 8 edition, I even prefer Windows Phone to Android. But I'd never use another MS OS on a laptop again. I'd rather learn Linux or even OS X than use Win 7 or 8. Windows 98 and Vista are still my favorite Microsoft OS versions, followed by XP and 2000. But they don't make them like they used to so I have to migrate to a different OS. OS X hasn't changed UI-wise as much as Windows since 2001, its development is evolutionary, while Microsoft tries too hard to recreate everything from scratch with every new Windows version. I don't like that at all, and XP and Vista are the only different-than-what-was-before looking Windows versions I like. Linux distros are also more consistent in their development and there's a distro for every taste. Instead of putting up with every new Windows version being way different than the former, I'd rather migrate to a different OS altogether.

[Max Norris]

OS X hasn't changed UI-wise as much as Windows since 2001, its development is evolutionary, while Microsoft tries too hard to recreate everything from scratch with every new Windows version.

Everything from scratch? Not sure where you're coming at with this one. You either are afraid of change, that is, don't buy new versions if you don't want anything to ever change, or you got thrown off by a new theme? The day-to-day differences for the end-user between 95 and 7 are fairly mild and evolutionary.. a few things changed/tweaked/added or removed, but the general usage hasn't changed since 95. (Obviously, under the hood is a different story.) Taskbar, start menu, desktop. Check. Added on and improved, but still functionally similar. Windows 8, yea I can see that throwing someone off for a few seconds if they didn't pay attention to that "click here" video during startup, and it takes all of 5 seconds to get that back to familiar territory if that's the users preference too. Desktop's still there, just another layer added on to it. Don't like it then don't use it, all of your old stuff still works after all these years, for me that's a much more appealing option than rolling the dice with another OS and hoping the stuff I need works. I'm pretty happy with 7, and it's supported until 2020. Know how much the various changes in 8 affect me? Not at all, and certainly not worth rage-quitting to another OS about.

Linux distros are also more consistent in their development

That's not a universal truth.. I can name a couple desktops that have gone from sane to WTF rather quickly. Tell me how consistent Gnome 2 vs Gnome 3 is for example, and that's not a change for the better. Bigger mistake than Windows 8. I had a chuckle when some other guy ranted about Windows 8 being touch friendly (even though the mouse shockingly still works)... and then switched to Gnome 3. KDE 3 to KDE 4.. kinda like that Windows XP to Windows 7 jump. Then you got the distros themselves that can make radical changes arbitrarily, look no further than Ubuntu or Arch for that one. Some major changes happened in both, many of which cheesed off users, and in Arch's case, caused some major breakage. It's not all sunshine and lollypops in Linux-land either.

[francescob]

Ha ha ha! Windows 3.1 with the Microsoft Entertainment Packs easily beats hands down all your fancy new Windows versions.

 

Who needs videos when you can have animated icons? Who needs DVDs when you can format your 1.44MB floppies up to 1.77MB?

 

P. S.: Skifree FTW!

[martin88]

I guess I just got fed up with Windows as a whole. I haven't used anything else since my first computer back in 1998 and I feel like I need a change. :)

[arkangel11004]

All lot of the people hating on vista on here have probably not tried vista sp2. I had windows 7 for the longest time, and decided to install vista for the fun of it. It actually runs faster than 7 on my machine. SP2 drastically reduces the draw on hardware components. The pin to taskbar in windows 7 is fine, but I would rather have the long vista style text tabs on the taskbar. I also love the switch between windows in windows Vista that is not in 7 (This window switching does a 3d scroll of all your windows open). I also like, as said on here before, that Vista does not rely on Live stuff like 7 does. I do not want all my stuff backed up with a micros. account or whatever. My PC data stays on my PC, unless I copy it to a device, as it should be. Vista was sluggish for most because they were 1. Running original or sp1 (but the damage had been done and no one gave SP2 a chance), 2. They were trying to run it on an XP computer that was mid-range at the time and couldn't handle vista. (A lot of this was fixed in SP2, but again damage was done no one cared).

 

 

Media Center In Vista SP2 is almost, if not completely, identical to the one in 7.

 

 

You forgot the major drawback of Vista compared to 7: performance improvements. Windows 7 is superior in practically every way to Vista, and even Windows 8 in some sense. If I could have just the performance improvements from 8 ported back to 7, I'd be so happy. 

Performance problems were alleviated with SP2, and 7 is a redressing of Vista, with minor gui changes (AeroSnap, etc), and minor software improvements. Service Pack 2 was released within 2 months of 7's release to bring Vista up to Par with 7, and it did that wonderfully.

 

 

Now, that said, Windows 8 I don't like, I have Windows 8.1 preview on my Acer Tablet, and that's the only use I see for it, touchscreens

And even on there I find it annoying and clunky.

I agree with this. I would rather have a full blown Vista or XP on a tablet that dumb Windows 8.Microsoft made th mistake of thinking that people wanted desktops and tablets to be the same. They were wrong. Desktops should always look like Vista, 7 or XP. (Start Menu, Taskbar, Windows, Icons) and tablets should be in there own category. I personally use android for my mobile device. Microsoft should focus its effort on its most profitable devices, the desktop and the laptop. Thats not to say they cant enter the tablet world, but they cannot go that route and expect Traditional Desktop Users to follow.

 

 

Isn't Windows 7 less secure by default?

No, even Vista's extended support runs until 2017. as long as Microsoft is Providing updates, they are patching security loopholes. Windows 8 claims to have more security features, which it may have, but that only is designed to protect the novice or average user. Windows 8 is just as vulnerable under a power user as any OS. Its just a matter or a virus writer building the right code to circumvent the security measures. It may take them a little longer to do it, but its not impossible. Virus software fills the gaps that updates dont, but nothings perfect.

 

I guess I just got fed up with Windows as a whole. I haven't used anything else since my first computer back in 1998 and I feel like I need a change. :)

Thats your choice, but I bet youll miss some windows only programs. See yo uback on Windows in the future, lol.

 

Not only the only one sticking with it, but probably the only one silly enough to admit it!  :s

 

Biggest POS Microsoft ever did. Not even Windows 8 is that bad. It's just to different for normal users.

 

Windows 7 will rule for quite some time, no matter how many times or how fast MS updates Windows 8!

You sir, have made an enemy. Windows 8 is the POS. 8 is not a desktop its a tablet pretending to be. Microsofts heavy users will always be Desktop Users, and that is where they should maintain their efforts. They can enter the tablet world, but they must keep it seperate from the Desktop World. A single OS across both platforms is just not necessary or desirable. I would however, love to see windows XP, Vista or 7 on a tablet. A full blown x86 one. That would be beast. Wndows 7 and Vista will dominate for a long time, with 7 ranking higher because of Vista's premature negative press. They will dominate most likely untill Microsoft pulls their head out the sand, and makes a truly desktop OS again.

 

 

I used vista in beta and when it was released and it was a terrible OS. It was only with SP1 where the bugs in the system were fully ironed out. Windows 7 is everything Vista was supposed to be. 

 

There were problems with USB, problems with media and network access, problems with sleep and resuming. This wasn't a case of computers not being powerful i tried it on a lot of different pc's and the results were the same, it was a buggy release, nvidia and intel didn't help with their drivers, microsoft didn't help with the vista certification allowing rubbish computers to come preinstalled with it. 

 

There were a lot of bugs and problems with Vista, like i said SP1 solved most of them, but that wasn't to say it was a good release. 

 

Windows 7 and 8 on the other hand have been excellent releases and have built upon the tech introduced in Vista. 

Ah, you are correct, and you also solidify my point. Vista became great, equal in performance and features (aside from snap, etc) in SP2. But by that point, people had already thown it in the trash and didn't give it the chance it deserved.Vista got knocked down hard, and got back up stronger than ever, but nobody saw it because they had all left the stadium. The USB, media, and sleep problems were all fixed in SP1 and SP2.

 

 

Um... O_O.

Yeah, good luck with downgrading to an OS released 7 years ago...

I still have a system running Windows XP. I have run a triple boot before with Vista, XP, and 7 all on the same pc. The drivers are still available for all of these. There will be no trouble other that locating drivers, which are all available, they just take a little time to find.

 

Another Thing that i didn't see mentioned on here was Vista huge driver database. Vista knows more drivers by default than Windows 7 or XP. This is a huge advantage.

 

In conclusion, Windows XP, Vista, and 7 are all great, with imo the avantage going to Vista because of its innovation, its comeback, and its features. (I actually missed the sidebar in 7)

Windows XP would have been the winner, as it allways has been, other than the fact of the UI improvements and features added in Vista.

 

Thanks, for reading by rambling,

 

 

                             akangel11004

 

 

[tsupersonic]

/sigh I wish people would check the dates of these threads before they reply...No one cares about VIsta - it still has a lower market share than Windows XP, which is quite sad.

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

/sigh I wish people would check the dates of these threads before they reply...No one cares about VIsta - it still has a lower market share than Windows XP, which is quite sad.

Agreed. Thus thread should have been closed a long time ago. :/

[Marshall Veteran]

For obvious reasons...

 

Closed