[Review] Windows Vista

[Mordkanin]

You can schedule disk defrag in XP. Make a batch file. Open up notepad and then type defrag c: or what ever drive which is a HDD. The file save as and name it defrag c drive.bat Save it in root or where ever then go to scheduled tasks. Waa Laa it's done. By the way in my opinion Vista sucks. I will boot to XP until SP1 comes out for Vista. Gaming is just weak in Vista. I just tried the new lost planet in DX 10 on Vista and when I run it the game says my hardware isn't good enough and I need to reconfigure my system. LMAO Look at my rig below. What a joke. I can run counter strike source with everthing maxed out and have an insane frame count (On Windows XP) Just my thoughts...

Mikee

The defrag algorithm used in Vista does not lend itself well to any form of progress bar. It doesn't know if it's going to repeat until it's done.

Also, SP1 will solve none of your game problems. Updated drivers will. You can blame nVidia for your woes.

Regarding estimated time left, I agree but also understand that having a countdown timer could be a bit misleading for the end user with information spread over hard drive clusters and computer performance differing from time to time.

As I said. The Vista defrag doesn't allow for estimated time.

Also. Vista automatically defrags by itself, weekly. If you don't shut this off, there is no point to ever run defrag, and therefore, an "estimated time left" is utterly useless.

[.Markus]

As I said. The Vista defrag doesn't allow for estimated time.

Also. Vista automatically defrags by itself, weekly. If you don't shut this off, there is no point to ever run defrag, and therefore, an "estimated time left" is utterly useless.

I think you're saying the same as me, however in a different way.

I do not concur about an estimated time remaining being 'utterly useless', as a scheduled run is not an possibility for every user.

[Mordkanin]

I think you're saying the same as me, however in a different way.

I do not concur about an estimated time remaining being 'utterly useless', as a scheduled run is not an possibility for every user.

Fair enough. Allow me to rephrase.

For 99.5+% of users, an estimated time remaining guage is utterly useless. (Note that XP didn't have one either)

Even for those very very very few users who can't run it scheduled (Though, it should be noted that I can't think of a valid reason as to why a schedule wouldn't work off of the top of my head), letting it just run until they can't let it run anymore, or until it ends on its own, is perfectly fine.

[soldier1st]

my only complaint about vista is that drm crap that's built in and tc and pallidium crap,it allows companies to go in your system and do what they want and never tell you,vista is not malware at all just has drm in it and only that i consider malware and not vista itself.the vista defragger just plain sucks so i use perfectdisk instead of it,i actualy do like the sidebar as it tells good info about the system and the new memory manager is indeed better than xp's version and to all those whiners that think you got no memory left then go out there and upgrade,vista uses that memory better than xp does and if you need more memory then vista will give it to you.

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

Have been using Vista since Beta 2 - got the Business RTM on January 31st, free through the business program at college.

Liked Vista so I'll upgrade to Ultimate next month.

[+Warwagon MVC]

anybody who compares Windows Vista, to Windows Me should be taken out back and executed

Edited May 28, 2007 by warwagon

[PL_ Veteran]

anybody who calls Windows Vista, windows Me 2 should be taken out back and executed

It ain't the new millenium yet either :laugh:

[ahhell]

I still find it amazing that people are still spouting off about "Vista being full of DRM".

Give it a rest already.

[velkymx]

ahhell - DRM is such a secondary issue. Personally I didn't run into any DRM issues at all with Vista.

[k311]

i have been using vista for a few weeks now since i purchased my new laptop and while i dont have any particular complaints yet, i am not very much impressed by the interface that we kept hearing so much about for months.

don't get me wrong, the interface is vastly improved from winxp, but it doesn't come close to comparing what linux can do, which is wrong to me seeing as linux is free and open source software. in my book, things that you pay for are usually supposed to look/work better than things that are free, which is not the case here.

i got spoiled using linux, and if the hardware support was better, i would probably be using it full time. thats not a knock on windows, that's a kudos to linux.

as for vista itself, i do like how they tidied up a lot of odds and ends all around, and there are lots of little improvements here and there that make a lot of sense, but there isnt any one thing about vista that makes me go "wow, that's worth an upgrade!". Maybe im not looking hard enough, but im not impressed.

on the flip side, unlike a lot of other people, i don't see any glaring problems with vista. the UAC that everyone whines about can be controlled nicely by enabling that 'secret' administrator account and you can even leave UAC on while doing so and not be bugged by all of those prompts. i havent run into any programs that i cant get to work, which is also good. in fact the only compatibility issue i noticed was some glitches in some menu screens when i installed starcraft, but im surprised it worked in the first place :laugh:

anyway, to sum things up, im not blown away by vista, but i dont see what everyone is complaining about either.

[Matrix XII]

anybody who compares Windows Vista, to Windows Me should be taken out back and executed

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

Have had Ultimate since early Sunday night (from Saturday to Sunday - at 1 am) on June 3rd.

Love the Full Meal Deal of it!

[+Warwagon MVC]

i have been using vista for a few weeks now since i purchased my new laptop and while i dont have any particular complaints yet, i am not very much impressed by the interface that we kept hearing so much about for months.

don't get me wrong, the interface is vastly improved from winxp, but it doesn't come close to comparing what linux can do, which is wrong to me seeing as linux is free and open source software. in my book, things that you pay for are usually supposed to look/work better than things that are free, which is not the case here.

i got spoiled using linux, and if the hardware support was better, i would probably be using it full time. thats not a knock on windows, that's a kudos to linux.

as for vista itself, i do like how they tidied up a lot of odds and ends all around, and there are lots of little improvements here and there that make a lot of sense, but there isnt any one thing about vista that makes me go "wow, that's worth an upgrade!". Maybe im not looking hard enough, but im not impressed.

on the flip side, unlike a lot of other people, i don't see any glaring problems with vista. the UAC that everyone whines about can be controlled nicely by enabling that 'secret' administrator account and you can even leave UAC on while doing so and not be bugged by all of those prompts. i havent run into any programs that i cant get to work, which is also good. in fact the only compatibility issue i noticed was some glitches in some menu screens when i installed starcraft, but im surprised it worked in the first place :laugh:

anyway, to sum things up, im not blown away by vista, but i dont see what everyone is complaining about either.

Very well worded!

[velkymx]

You know i have the same problem with Vista I have with Linux. I don't care about how the job gets done as long as it gets done. Vista is half baked at best - as is Linux (terminal anyone). I could care less about the Kernel or the defragger - I can that explorer can't remember settings and that if there is one JPG in a folder it thinks the folder is full of pictures, when it isn't. Or that menus are different in each are of the system. Pic one and run with it for god's sake!!!

[ServerMechanic]

Nice review. I used Vista Business for 2 months also on my work laptop. Went back to XP Pro with SP2.

It lost my profile a couple times and did random other dumb things. It's certainly not what I would call a "ready" release.

I work in IT, and have an MCSE, and Linux+ certs. My next home computer will be a Mac.

[russellc]

I don't get the person saying you need an amazing dual core system with at least 2 GB of RAM. I run it on a system with some Pentium 4 @ 2.8C GHz (so that was when "hyper-threading" came around), IIRC, and 1 GB RAM (not running in dual channel) and for the past three weeks, it has been running fine. Not a single problem; only had to download a few drivers and then it was all good. It runs DWM with Aero perfectly fine and snappy, runs games fine at a mediocre 1280x768 resolution (on a 20 inch widescreen, mind you) and is never slow when running applications. It scores 3.7, I think, for the "Windows Experience" score, so contrary to what many say, it runs fine on a lower range (in today's standards) computer. The video card is an ATI Radeon 9600 Pro, by the way.

I agree with the review, though. A lot of things seem like a step backward and I also hate the fact that Windows seems more and more mouse-centric (correct me if I'm wrong, because I don't use the Vista machine myself, I only play games periodically on it and set it up for my parents/help my parents when they need help). The operating system is decent for people who are not computer-savvy, but it doesn't seem that great for power users; this can be a negative point, but can also be a selling point. It is certainly good for my parents, but on the bad list for me, which is why I use Linux :p

[FlibbyFlobby]

i have been using vista for a few weeks now since i purchased my new laptop and while i dont have any particular complaints yet, i am not very much impressed by the interface that we kept hearing so much about for months.

don't get me wrong, the interface is vastly improved from winxp, but it doesn't come close to comparing what linux can do, which is wrong to me seeing as linux is free and open source software. in my book, things that you pay for are usually supposed to look/work better than things that are free, which is not the case here.

i got spoiled using linux, and if the hardware support was better, i would probably be using it full time. thats not a knock on windows, that's a kudos to linux.

as for vista itself, i do like how they tidied up a lot of odds and ends all around, and there are lots of little improvements here and there that make a lot of sense, but there isnt any one thing about vista that makes me go "wow, that's worth an upgrade!". Maybe im not looking hard enough, but im not impressed.

on the flip side, unlike a lot of other people, i don't see any glaring problems with vista. the UAC that everyone whines about can be controlled nicely by enabling that 'secret' administrator account and you can even leave UAC on while doing so and not be bugged by all of those prompts. i havent run into any programs that i cant get to work, which is also good. in fact the only compatibility issue i noticed was some glitches in some menu screens when i installed starcraft, but im surprised it worked in the first place :laugh:

anyway, to sum things up, im not blown away by vista, but i dont see what everyone is complaining about either.

I browse Linux desktop threads on various websites and forums, day in and day out and I've never seen anything I would consider truly beautiful. Usually there are major inconsistencies and many of the themes are just plain fugly. I also don't see how windows setting on fire when I minimise them improves my user experience or the appearance of the OS as a whole.

Windows Vista has a decent and consistent look to it, and most of the design decisions in terms of usability are actually solid. For example maximised windows are solid coloured and opaque (along with the taskbar) so your attention is focused on the task at hand. The transparent windows mean your eyes are focused on the content within them rather than the surrounding frame. The white on black approach is also easy on the eye over prolonged periods, plus we all know black goes with anything. The simple fade in and out actions are smooth and timely, and add a certain amount of flow and tangency to the feel of the OS.

Most attacks on Windows Vista's appearance tend to be baseless, usually someones own personal tastes after giving it 2 minutes of actual usage (or viewing a video on YouTube! or just hating on Microsoft as per usual!). Good to see people are ignoring some decent design decisions over some fancy over rated graphics and gimmicks like what Beryl seems to offer. Beryl may have some good usability features, but for the most part its gimmicks that aren't going to help usability imo.

This 'bling' war has been created by people who have totally missed the point of many of the enhancements Aero offers to users.

[russellc]

I browse Linux desktop threads on various websites and forums, day in and day out and I've never seen anything I would consider truly beautiful. Usually there are major inconsistencies and many of the themes are just plain fugly. I also don't see how windows setting on fire when I minimise them improves my user experience or the appearance of the OS as a whole.

Windows Vista has a decent and consistent look to it, and most of the design decisions in terms of usability are actually solid. For example maximised windows are solid coloured and opaque (along with the taskbar) so your attention is focused on the task at hand. The transparent windows mean your eyes are focused on the content within them rather than the surrounding frame. The white on black approach is also easy on the eye over prolonged periods, plus we all know black goes with anything. The simple fade in and out actions are smooth and timely, and add a certain amount of flow and tangency to the feel of the OS.

Most attacks on Windows Vista's appearance tend to be baseless, usually someones own personal tastes after giving it 2 minutes of actual usage (or viewing a video on YouTube! or just hating on Microsoft as per usual!). Good to see people are ignoring some decent design decisions over some fancy over rated graphics and gimmicks like what Beryl seems to offer. Beryl may have some good usability features, but for the most part its gimmicks that aren't going to help usability imo.

This 'bling' war has been created by people who have totally missed the point of many of the enhancements Aero offers to users.

Have you actually used Linux with Beryl/Compiz or just Linux with its wide selection of interface options? I have to disagree your point regarding interface inconsistency in Linux. I find it significantly more consistent than that of Windows. A few examples: Windows Live Messenger, the whole Windows "Live" line, Office, Internet Explorer 7, Windows Media Player, etc. Theming in Linux (in regards to GTK, which is what Gnome applications use, and others as well) is much more thorougly consistent than Windows. Window decorations and such are also thorougly consistent throughout the operating system. And please tell us, what "enhancements" does Aero really offer that previous versions of Windows haven't already, besides the translucent, blurry window borders and fade transitions?

Beryl/Compiz are not only there for looks; they have many plugins which increase both usability and productivity. Vista's appearance isn't bad per se, but if you compare it to say, OS X, it is much on a lower scale in terms of usability or productivity. Beryl/Compiz takes some features, like the Expose feature, from OS X, and also has an array of its own features which increase productivity (the cube is just great). You don't sound like you've actually used Beryl/Compiz on Linux more than 2 minutes before you judge, so it sounds like you're a hypocrite, unless you have used it for significantly more than that; enough to judge, at least. In any case, your arguments are relatively baseless as well.

[delloptiplex]

my only complaint about vista is that drm crap that's built in and tc and pallidium crap,it allows companies to go in your system and do what they want and never tell you,vista is not malware at all just has drm in it and only that i consider malware and not vista itself.the vista defragger just plain sucks so i use perfectdisk instead of it,i actualy do like the sidebar as it tells good info about the system and the new memory manager is indeed better than xp's version and to all those whiners that think you got no memory left then go out there and upgrade,vista uses that memory better than xp does and if you need more memory then vista will give it to you.

i weep for humanity

[FlibbyFlobby]

Have you actually used Linux with Beryl/Compiz or just Linux with its wide selection of interface options? I have to disagree your point regarding interface inconsistency in Linux. I find it significantly more consistent than that of Windows.

Nice to see you making sweeping assumptions. Well you'd be wrong. I used to run Ubuntu as my primary OS for quite a while (more than '2 minutes'), and on my laptop (which I use extensively). Both setup's ran Beryl, and my primary desktop ran dual screens on an Nvidia GeForce FX 5200. Why are you making such ridiculous assumptions anyway? Perhaps because if I had 'really' used a Linux distribution of Beryl there is no possible way I could actually find its usability bad, right?

I like a few Linux distributions, but they still have a long way to go in terms of usability for me personally.

A few examples: Windows Live Messenger, the whole Windows "Live" line, Office, Internet Explorer 7, Windows Media Player, etc. Theming in Linux (in regards to GTK, which is what Gnome applications use, and others as well) is much more thorougly consistent than Windows. Window decorations and such are also thorougly consistent throughout the operating system. And please tell us, what "enhancements" does Aero really offer that previous versions of Windows haven't already, besides the translucent, blurry window borders and fade transitions?

The UI in Windows Vista IS consistent. Why do you think IE7 looks fugly in Windows XP, because its designed to be suited to Windows Vista (no menu bar), just like Office 2007 and Windows Live Messenger 8.5 Beta are too. Hell they're even making the online 'Live' stuff fit in with Windows Vista's appearance (like Windows Live Mail).

I clearly listed just some of the things Aero offers in terms of usability. Presumably if you had tried it, you'd know what they were anyway. I don't need to defend Windows Vista anyway. I know it offers plenty of enhancements over previous versions of Windows, and that more people will realise that too when its on more desktops. I don't expect Linux zealots to agree with me anyway (or to give Windows Vista a genuine chance); England have more chance of winning the World Cup to be honest.

Beryl/Compiz are not only there for looks; they have many plugins which increase both usability and productivity. Vista's appearance isn't bad per se, but if you compare it to say, OS X, it is much on a lower scale in terms of usability or productivity. Beryl/Compiz takes some features, like the Expose feature, from OS X, and also has an array of its own features which increase productivity (the cube is just great). You don't sound like you've actually used Beryl/Compiz on Linux more than 2 minutes before you judge, so it sounds like you're a hypocrite, unless you have used it for significantly more than that; enough to judge, at least. In any case, your arguments are relatively baseless as well.

Sorry but I've not seen a totally consistent UI in any distribution I've used (Ubuntu, OpenSuse, Fedora and Mandriva) regardless of whether it was KDE or Gnome. I regard consistency to be more than just the icons all being the same theme btw. I also regard a good UI to look pleasing to the eye, I don't see much of that in some Linux distributions either (orangey brown, yummy). Perhaps its just my personal taste? Its still what I see.

Beryl does have some interesting usability features, and if you'd read what I put before jumping into an argument blindly, you'd see I confirmed that. What I actually said was I feel for the most part its a gimmick. This whole 'bling' war that the Linux community seems to be embarking upon is based upon the wrong ideals. Windows Vista might have slick and shiny features to entice customers in, but underneath it are solid and consistent UI and usability decisions that have been thought through and tested. In my opinion the Linux community have missed this and gone off on a more gimmicky "it looks cool" path and Beryl has many examples of this to me.

You really need to drop your accusatory tone though, seriously. Just because I have a different opinion to you, and what you are passionate about you think I must be wrong, or maybe I haven't tried it? Maybe I just genuinely disagree? Shock, horror!

[russellc]

Nice to see you making sweeping assumptions. Well you'd be wrong. I used to run Ubuntu as my primary OS for quite a while (more than '2 minutes'), and on my laptop (which I use extensively). Both setup's ran Beryl, and my primary desktop ran dual screens on an Nvidia GeForce FX 5200. Why are you making such ridiculous assumptions anyway? Perhaps because if I had 'really' used a Linux distribution of Beryl there is no possible way I could actually find its usability bad, right?

I like a few Linux distributions, but they still have a long way to go in terms of usability for me personally.

The UI in Windows Vista IS consistent. Why do you think IE7 looks fugly in Windows XP, because its designed to be suited to Windows Vista (no menu bar), just like Office 2007 and Windows Live Messenger 8.5 Beta are too. Hell they're even making the online 'Live' stuff fit in with Windows Vista's appearance (like Windows Live Mail).

I clearly listed just some of the things Aero offers in terms of usability. Presumably if you had tried it, you'd know what they were anyway. I don't need to defend Windows Vista anyway. I know it offers plenty of enhancements over previous versions of Windows, and that more people will realise that too when its on more desktops. I don't expect Linux zealots to agree with me anyway (or to give Windows Vista a genuine chance); England have more chance of winning the World Cup to be honest.

Sorry but I've not seen a totally consistent UI in any distribution I've used (Ubuntu, OpenSuse, Fedora and Mandriva) regardless of whether it was KDE or Gnome. I regard consistency to be more than just the icons all being the same theme btw. I also regard a good UI to look pleasing to the eye, I don't see much of that in some Linux distributions either (orangey brown, yummy). Perhaps its just my personal taste? Its still what I see.

Beryl does have some interesting usability features, and if you'd read what I put before jumping into an argument blindly, you'd see I confirmed that. What I actually said was I feel for the most part its a gimmick. This whole 'bling' war that the Linux community seems to be embarking upon is based upon the wrong ideals. Windows Vista might have slick and shiny features to entice customers in, but underneath it are solid and consistent UI and usability decisions that have been thought through and tested. In my opinion the Linux community have missed this and gone off on a more gimmicky "it looks cool" path and Beryl has many examples of this to me.

You really need to drop your accusatory tone though, seriously. Just because I have a different opinion to you, and what you are passionate about you think I must be wrong, or maybe I haven't tried it? Maybe I just genuinely disagree? Shock, horror!

So you're being a little hypocritical. I use Vista just as often as I use Linux, if not more. If you think Vista has a consistent UI, please tell me why Windows Live Messenger is now radically changed in terms of appearance every major update? And why Microsoft Office has a random orange button at the top left of the screen which is differently shaped than any other application? Why they moved away from the standard toolbar and why Office applications now look completely different from any other application? As for Internet Explorer, tell me why the tabs are completely different from the other tabs of the UI? I could mention more strange inconsistencies, like how they simply split up the Display Properties into individual windows on their own which now have a single solitary tab on them. Why they chose to do this baffles me.

You are right about it offering more enhancements than previous versions of Windows, but flexibility and feature enhancements are constantly in abundance on Linux. Also, orange brown is not the only colour you can have in Linux. You can make it look exactly like Vista if you please, or completely unlike it. You can make it whatever you want, which is something Windows does not offer. You should focus on Compiz and it's advancements in stable code and usability rather than Beryl which is discontinued now and was concentrating on the "it looks cool" factor.

I do apologize as coming off accusatory. I've had a rough week and have not been feeling right. You do have your own opinion of the user interface and I shall respect that; but I also have my own opinion of the interface on Vista and it just does not seem consistent compared to what I see often in Linux. Maybe I am just to nitpicky or something.

[SnowRanger13]

I like Vista, most things are easier and faster. Gaming performance is definitly slower on Vista then on XP, my guess is drivers. Luckaly most of the games I play on PC right now are a few years old so it's not a huge problem.

I hope some new drivers come out soon that kick things working like they useto.

[Yuxi]

I've had my share of driver issues with vista. However, one thing I can't live without is the start menu search bar. Now every time I use someone else's computer with XP I open the start menu and start typing :laugh:

[+vlsi0n Subscriber¹]

Well regardless I really like Vista, and it'll only get better from here. (driver, program, etc support)

[MrCobra]

See this is why kids shouldn't have sex...Becuase they are too immature to do it properly and safely! Same thing applies in this situation. I have given up trying to convince these fools that Windows Vista is not the crap they make it out to be.

That had to be the lamest post on here that I've read.

Driver support is not a flaw of an operating system. Microsoft isn't even at fault here...

The driver subsystem was radically changed and moved from kernel mode to user mode. Things that used to just work now no longer work and need to redesigned to do so. Nvidia, ATi and Creative are not the only companies that are having problems writing drivers. That being the case, how do you figure that Microsoft doesn't have any responsibility for that?