No more VISTA in this house...

[Preppy Veteran]

How? What do they say is the problem? Because if they're just blowing smoke, you can quickly solve that by pinning them down to what exactly is being fixed.

I don't know what your particular support options are. You can always call and check.

[Dashel]

New system -> Vista. Old system -> XP. Simple.

Shhh trekkie, that might make too much sense. ;)

[obsolete_power]

The most ignorant post, ever, in this thread.

You are one of the MANY people I look down upon and pitty. If you missed my point then I suggest you read again and restrain yourself from posting nonesense.

[gigapixels Veteran]

You are one of the MANY people I look down upon and pitty. If you missed my point then I suggest you read again and restrain yourself from posting nonesense.

:rofl: Oh my god, YOU just said HE posts nonsense? LMAO You are by far one of the most ignorant posters I've ever seen on this entire board. You post nothing BUT nonsense. Seriously, I'm in awe of how oblivious you are to everything.

[Foub]

I suppose that you also believe that we should be stuck on MS DOS, since when NT was released all the DOS programs have existed for a long time, and Windows should at least have worked with DOS, right? :rolleyes:

And 640k should be enough RAM for anyone as well. :)

[Chester0]

Coffee anyone? :p

[ScottKin]

I have vista and XP and I actually prefer neither of them, personally Ubuntu is fine. Although I use Vista and XP everyday Vista is the slowest, memory hogging, demanding most expensive thing Microsoft have bought out in a LONG time.XP or Ubuntu all the way! :D

That's rather odd, since I've been running Vista Ultimate x32 with zero problems on my AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (Sledgehammer), and by far it's faster than XP and XP 64 on my very pedestrian system.It would be interesting to see what your machine's specs are, and if you did an upgrade versus a clean install.--ScottKin

A simple comparison of the same top of the line machine loaded (Core2, 4 GB Ram, Geforce8 Series, SATA 7.2k drive) with XP vs. Vista will show you how much slower vista is. So "why don't people get it in their heads" that Vista is a slower performer then XP? I guess I'm in that minority that wants every bit of juice out of my hardware on a windows platform, I guess if I wasn't a gamer it wouldn't matter because general desktop performance is ok for the most part, and then I would just use a linux box anyways. But yes the best thing to do is wait to go to Vista when you get a new machine. I think too many people do not approach this topic objectively.

CFR?(For those who don't know what "CFR" means, it stands for "Call For References")Show us a pure, unbiased example - with the metrics as well - to show that Vista is slower than XP.--ScottKin

[chris.baldwin]

Wow many people that replied to his post in here should be ashamed of themselves....if all you can see from what he posted is the way he writes then you seriously need to grow up some! I am going to make this clear for you once and for all!! Vista will only be a fine upgrade for amateur computer users. If you are a power user then Vista should be kept off your system. If all you need windows for is to run office, browse the web and install your occasional game then purchasing a retail copy of Vista will be a great experience for you. The point he is trying to make is that if you are a pro user where you need powerful applications and seemless compatibility, Vista retail is a terrible investment. If you listen to any tech expert's opinion on Vista, you will see "Right now, you should only get Vista if it comes bundled with the new computer you are about to get but upgrading your existing computer to it is a bad decision" If you want a specific example, call up Leo Laporte of the TWiTT network and ask him about this. He will say the same thing and many others. How about Paul Thurrott as an example....Start listening to people that actually DO know what they are talking about before you decide to pick on someone (like the OP) who is simply stating facts and uses his own experiences to back that up. Microsoft isn't to blame here and we all know that so when someone says Vista isn't worth it, he is just saying that right now it isn't a feasible investment but down the road it will surpass anything we have seen so far.

FINALLY! Someone who knows what they are talking about :cool:

When I bought my Dell Inspiron laptop Vista had only just been released and the darn thing kept on locking up on me. After I had sent that back to Dell I went down to Comet to get another laptop HP Pavillion Entertainment Laptop PC dv6262 which had Vista PRE-INSTALLED!!

Why can't the companies get the fact that Vista at the moment is s**t and start selling computer with Windows 98? :p

[Piepke]

I can't believe how many people blame this person for posting his experience with the OS! He may have given the wrong reasons why Vista was not OK for him... but does that make his post pointless?

The reason of his post was most likely to express his feelings about the OS not being what he expected. I'm sure you all have a post like that on your list...

I've probably gone from XP to Vista 5 times and after a few weeks I end up going back anyway... each time for my own reason: I have the feeling Windows is organizing my files instead of me. All the fancy icons, animations, widgets... are just not my taste. I'm sure people like it but it's not fit for my everyday use.

Several improvements in file handling have also caused frustration for me.

Performance-wise it's great, I have all my drivers, they work (not 100% but enough not to bother me). It's stable... but it's just not my thing.

Now you can all go reply on my post as well and comment that I'm selfish and should not post this and it's not true... your choice...my point was clear enough.

[gigapixels Veteran]

FINALLY! Someone who knows what they are talking about :cool:

:rofl: :laugh:

[ScottKin]

Wow many people that replied to his post in here should be ashamed of themselves....if all you can see from what he posted is the way he writes then you seriously need to grow up some! I am going to make this clear for you once and for all!! Vista will only be a fine upgrade for amateur computer users. If you are a power user then Vista should be kept off your system. If all you need windows for is to run office, browse the web and install your occasional game then purchasing a retail copy of Vista will be a great experience for you. The point he is trying to make is that if you are a pro user where you need powerful applications and seemless compatibility, Vista retail is a terrible investment. If you listen to any tech expert's opinion on Vista, you will see "Right now, you should only get Vista if it comes bundled with the new computer you are about to get but upgrading your existing computer to it is a bad decision" If you want a specific example, call up Leo Laporte of the TWiTT network and ask him about this. He will say the same thing and many others. How about Paul Thurrott as an example....Start listening to people that actually DO know what they are talking about before you decide to pick on someone (like the OP) who is simply stating facts and uses his own experiences to back that up. Microsoft isn't to blame here and we all know that so when someone says Vista isn't worth it, he is just saying that right now it isn't a feasible investment but down the road it will surpass anything we have seen so far.

Ummm - you do know that Leo Laporte is a Apple bigot - right?. Leo knows his stuff, and he's been using computers for quite some time, but that does not make him the Oracle Of All Knowledge. As for Paul Thurott, he's been wrong plenty of times, so he doesn't get to wear the OOAK crown either. I have at least as much experience in computing (28 years or so) as Leo and Paul have, and for some reason either they're missing the boat or I was blessed to have my Vista Ultimate running excellently on my rather pedestrian System.

Now, on to the discussion...

Your comments about "(listen to) any tech..." is entirely misleading. I know plenty of "techs" (including myself) who see Vista as an excellent product and worth it to upgrade a system no more than 3 years old. The trouble starts when people start installing Vista on systems that barely ran XP - and I've had to deal with plenty of calls from friends about their problems with Vista; clearly, ~60% of my "regulars" had problems installing Vista because some of their computer's components didn't work with Vista - which was due to lack of driver support. I'm as much a "power user" as anyone and I've had zero glitches on my system since RTM. I use my Vista system for the Streaming Audio service I'm the Programming Manager and primary DJ for, and I can run Joost and / or Vista MCE with zero problems, hangs or stalls. The only problem I've ever had with Vista has been the inconvenience of having some gadgets on the desktop not keeping their exact position on the desktop.

My secret - do a CLEAN install. If you don't and you're not going to do a clean install because it will mess-up your Startup folder or cause problems with a game that you've played on XP over the last 5 years, then that's your choice. I can also play Halo & Homeworld 2 perfectly while running the Streaming software, a full Sidebar, mIRC, WinAmp, Outlook AND IE7 all at the same time, with only the occasional flooder in a mIRC window.

Maybe everyone should come to my studio and rub my PC's chassis to get some of the magic rubbed off onto them?

:woot:

--ScottKin

[FlibbyFlobby]

I understand some people are frustrated with Windows Vista, but more often than not the problem tends to lie with crap drivers or a vendor not pulling their finger out. And in my experience its usually someone who has tried Vista for about 30 minutes before giving up and going back to XP.

I'm not lumping the OP into this category, but if you have a specific grievance or problem, why not try to solve it first? Ever thought it might actually not be the fault of Windows Vista or Microsoft (God forbid!)? Also I hate this resource hog crap. Since when did a modern OS need to use less resources? Isn't technology meant to be moving forward? Are free resources actually helping speed up your system anyway? No!

I'm surprised I haven't seen any "I'm waiting for SP1" comments yet. :laugh: Aren't those obligatory in these threads?!

[Inplode]

this whole topic needs to be delete and the OP banished form the board .. its clearly a troll post

[markwolfe Veteran]

this whole topic needs to be delete and the OP banished form the board .. its clearly a troll post

<sarcasm>

Yes, because obviously differing opinions from ones that you may hold are not to be tolerated.

</sarcasm>

[Foub]

It seems that every time Microsoft puts out a new OS it is like when they pave the road you have to buy a new car. Linux allows you to keep your car instead as well as getting more accessories for it. :)

[gigapixels Veteran]

It seems that every time Microsoft puts out a new OS it is like when they pave the road you have to buy a new car. Linux allows you to keep your car instead as well as getting more accessories for it. :)

No, not really. The ONLY release as of yet that has pushed hardware so much is Vista. Any other release has needed minor improvements in hardware from previous releases, so minor that most people needed not worry at all as they were usually far past the minimum requirements.

[obsolete_power]

Ummm - you do know that Leo Laporte is a Apple bigot - right?. Leo knows his stuff, and he's been using computers for quite some time, but that does not make him the Oracle Of All Knowledge. As for Paul Thurott, he's been wrong plenty of times, so he doesn't get to wear the OOAK crown either. I have at least as much experience in computing (28 years or so) as Leo and Paul have, and for some reason either they're missing the boat or I was blessed to have my Vista Ultimate running excellently on my rather pedestrian System.

Now, on to the discussion...

Your comments about "(listen to) any tech..." is entirely misleading. I know plenty of "techs" (including myself) who see Vista as an excellent product and worth it to upgrade a system no more than 3 years old. The trouble starts when people start installing Vista on systems that barely ran XP - and I've had to deal with plenty of calls from friends about their problems with Vista; clearly, ~60% of my "regulars" had problems installing Vista because some of their computer's components didn't work with Vista - which was due to lack of driver support. I'm as much a "power user" as anyone and I've had zero glitches on my system since RTM. I use my Vista system for the Streaming Audio service I'm the Programming Manager and primary DJ for, and I can run Joost and / or Vista MCE with zero problems, hangs or stalls. The only problem I've ever had with Vista has been the inconvenience of having some gadgets on the desktop not keeping their exact position on the desktop.

My secret - do a CLEAN install. If you don't and you're not going to do a clean install because it will mess-up your Startup folder or cause problems with a game that you've played on XP over the last 5 years, then that's your choice. I can also play Halo & Homeworld 2 perfectly while running the Streaming software, a full Sidebar, mIRC, WinAmp, Outlook AND IE7 all at the same time, with only the occasional flooder in a mIRC window.

Maybe everyone should come to my studio and rub my PC's chassis to get some of the magic rubbed off onto them?

:woot:

--ScottKin

Okay I don't think you understood two of the things I said. First of all, when I said people should listen to tech experts I meant that for amateur computer users, that is always a good start. The second thing, I never said anything about performance of the operating system. As long as your computer is no more than 2-3 years old it should run fine. All I was talking about was the compatibility. I have run into countless problems because software (including games) didn't run on Vista or ran very poorly. Until third-party developers get their act together and start supporting the operating system, people are best to keep the money in the bank for now, until there is more support. Video drivers from nVidia is a great example because they are terrible. Sli is buggy or doesn't work at all and I have seen in all my games, running them on Vista causes them to lose major FPS. If you go to a greater level of market, such as the government or education institutions, you'll see how many are rejecting Vista because of these problems. Also, why do you think Dell reverted back to selling Windows XP? Vista is a good investment either way IMHO. I think the positives surpass the negatives by a long shot. Now I don't really know how people feel because I have three copies of Vista (2 Ultimate and 1 business) which I didn't pay for but are legit. I got one Ultimate from Microsoft in December for beta testing, another Ultimate when I ordered a physical DVD of the 32-bit version $14) and they messed up the order and not only did they NOT bill me the $14 but they sent me an envelope that contained both DVDs of the 32 and 64-bit versions plus a valid key, and one Vista business I got through my university's MSDNAA program.

[Foub]

No, not really. The ONLY release as of yet that has pushed hardware so much is Vista. Any other release has needed minor improvements in hardware from previous releases, so minor that most people needed not worry at all as they were usually far past the minimum requirements.

XP forced many to get new hardware because much of their old was no longer compatible. When I first got XP I had to upgrade my CPU and get more RAM to run it effectively as well even though I had the "minimum requirement" before. Its the same thing with Vista. Remember, I had said before that I have around 25 years experience with Microsoft's OSes.

BTW, I'm not the one who first came up with the comparison to paving the road. That was from many years ago about Microsoft.

[Inplode]

Okay I don't think you understood two of the things I said. First of all, when I said people should listen to tech experts I meant that for amateur computer users, that is always a good start. The second thing, I never said anything about performance of the operating system. As long as your computer is no more than 2-3 years old it should run fine. All I was talking about was the compatibility. I have run into countless problems because software (including games) didn't run on Vista or ran very poorly. Until third-party developers get their act together and start supporting the operating system, people are best to keep the money in the bank for now, until there is more support. Video drivers from nVidia is a great example because they are terrible. Sli is buggy or doesn't work at all and I have seen in all my games, running them on Vista causes them to lose major FPS. If you go to a greater level of market, such as the government or education institutions, you'll see how many are rejecting Vista because of these problems. Also, why do you think Dell reverted back to selling Windows XP? Vista is a good investment either way IMHO. I think the positives surpass the negatives by a long shot. Now I don't really know how people feel because I have three copies of Vista (2 Ultimate and 1 business) which I didn't pay for but are legit. I got one Ultimate from Microsoft in December for beta testing, another Ultimate when I ordered a physical DVD of the 32-bit version $14) and they messed up the order and not only did they NOT bill me the $14 but they sent me an envelope that contained both DVDs of the 32 and 64-bit versions plus a valid key, and one Vista business I got through my university's MSDNAA program.

wall of text crits you for 567869375939 damage

[gigapixels Veteran]

XP forced many to get new hardware because much of their old was no longer compatible. When I first got XP I had to upgrade my CPU and get more RAM to run it effectively as well even though I had the "minimum requirement" before. Its the same thing with Vista. Remember, I had said before that I have around 25 years experience with Microsoft's OSes.

BTW, I'm not the one who first came up with the comparison to paving the road. That was from many years ago about Microsoft.

I don't care how much experience you have with Microsoft operating systems if you can't seem to be unbiased in topics about them. I for one never heard of people needing to upgrade their current hardware for Windows XP if they were meeting the minimum requirements. In fact, I know of many people who ran Windows XP on computers far under the requirements and still ran it perfectly fine.

Just because it wasn't you who made the comparison doesn't make it any more valid. I find it incorrect.

[obsolete_power]

Okay I don't think you understood two of the things I said. First of all, when I said people should listen to tech experts I meant that for amateur computer users, that is always a good start.

The second thing, I never said anything about performance of the operating system. As long as your computer is no more than 2-3 years old it should run fine. All I was talking about was the compatibility. I have run into countless problems because software (including games) didn't run on Vista or ran very poorly. Until third-party developers get their act together and start supporting the operating system, people are best to keep the money in the bank for now, until there is more support. Video drivers from nVidia is a great example because they are terrible. Sli is buggy or doesn't work at all and I have seen in all my games, running them on Vista causes them to lose major FPS.

If you go to a greater level of market, such as the government or education institutions, you'll see how many are rejecting Vista because of these problems. Also, why do you think Dell reverted back to selling Windows XP? Vista is a good investment either way IMHO. I think the positives surpass the negatives by a long shot.

Now I don't really know how people feel because I have three copies of Vista (2 Ultimate and 1 business) which I didn't pay for but are legit. I got one Ultimate from Microsoft in December for beta testing, another Ultimate when I ordered a physical DVD of the 32-bit version $14) and they messed up the order and not only did they NOT bill me the $14 but they sent me an envelope that contained both DVDs of the 32 and 64-bit versions plus a valid key, and one Vista business I got through my university's MSDNAA program.

Here I reposted with a more spaced out version of my previous post.

[Invizibleyez]

I think maybe SP1 for Vista should rename the OS "Scapegoat".

It seems no matter what happens wrong with a anything, the blame always goes to the company that seems to have the most money. In this case, that is Microsoft.

I personally find that most people who complain about Vista have Laptops, which are heavily supported only by their manufacturers. I believe Dell has reintroduced XP for 2 reasons, reason 1 is that it was heavily requested by the hordes of people who have had problems with their Dells running Vista. The actual fact that Dell had to do this to me makes Dell seem like the biggest crap support company in the world. If Dell properly supported their systems, the drivers provided by Dell would work great with their machines for Vista. Since Dell can't make the proper drivers for their hardware to run Vista, they had to re-introduce XP.

I personally have Vista Ultimate 64bit running on my main machine, and have had no problems, except for creative labs lack of software support, and decent drivers for their Audigy series.

I love Vista for a VERY strong reason. It is making it very clear who the good manufactuers are versus the bad manufacturers. So far, the worst companies that stick out to me now more than ever are: Creative Labs, Nvidia, and Dell.

[NEVER85]

Vista is a real hit or miss OS, it seems. People either love it to death or wish it sent to the 7th circle of Hell. Personally, I love Vista and will never use XP on one of my computers again. XP would be too much of a step back IMO.

[kouhii00]

I just bought a laptop with Vista Home Premium installed. First thing I did was format the sucker and did a fresh install; Vista installs fast! Then download the Vista drivers from the laptop manufacture's website. 0 crash 0 BSOD. All the programs in XP(32) works in Vista(32) for me. I don't know about the resource hog part but with 2GB of RAM on my laptop Vista only uses about 600MB of ram when I let it idle; I have not tweaked anything in Vista, all default. My XP machine uses about 300MB of RAM when idle, default setup.

I forgot to mention, even when my centrino c2d underclocks to 800MHz (from 2GHz) and FSB to 400MHz (from 800MHz) Vista still runs smooth.

[dr.bisho]

Wow, that was possibly the worst written post I have seen in a long time.

Look - Vista is generally fine. Driver support is poor, nd people are slow to adapt to the (IMHO) improved interface.

But some people have good experiences and some don't.

agree... every one has his own experience ,,, and own idea to build about vista...

E.G. my brother has been trying to convince me of how bad vista is since i installed it, yet i face driver problems, and erors, yet i stand for my opinion...