Circaflex Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Vista isnt even bad, i have no problems with it (Vista Business x64) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordkanin Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 as well as Monad, aka Windows new shell prompt. Powershell has been out for like 7 months. It's not 'supposed' to be awesome. It is awesome. It's completely replaced cmd for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNay Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 IMHO, Vista is more like Win2000. Following that logic, the next release might be more akin to XP. Of course, it's way too early to say if that will really be the case. I agree with you on that. I don't see why people compare it as if its like ME. It's more like 2000 for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiGdUsTy Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I got Vista on a new laptop a month ago and after upgrading to two gigs of ram and disabling UAC it's not that bad at all. What Vista really needs at this point is for the hardware manufacturers to get off there ass's and write some solid drivers. (aka Creative, Nvidia and ATI/AMD etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadeem97 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Because it's a pretty huge overhaul, lots of new technology, but causes some compatibility issues, has a new driver model, etc. Those Compatibility issues you are talking about are in no way MS's Fault .. Microsoft Offered Rc1 , RC2 , and RTM Versions starting 4 months before vista went retail , thats quite a good time for devolopers to check their programs / drivers compatibility for vista and improve it.. Unfortunately , they didnt , they waited for the Retail , and then started to rush everything , like NviDia did... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addc182 Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 :rofl: Oh man, thanks, I needed a good laugh.Anybody who says Vista is like ME has no clue what he/she is talking about. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted July 17, 2007 Veteran Share Posted July 17, 2007 Those Compatibility issues you are talking about are in no way MS's Fault ..Microsoft Offered Rc1 , RC2 , and RTM Versions starting 4 months before vista went retail , thats quite a good time for devolopers to check their programs / drivers compatibility for vista and improve it.. Unfortunately , they didnt , they waited for the Retail , and then started to rush everything , like NviDia did... Hehe, no one knows that better than me =P But it was the same with Windows 2000, which had a long (very stable and complete) beta 3 and a long RC process. It still took a while for hardware OEMs and ISVs to get on-board and really support it. There was even a time when ATI insisted they would never support Windows 2000's GDI acceleration, for example :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dashel Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Is that supposed to be an insult? Fie on all you ME haters. I agree with Brandon though, his Win2k analogy is fitting as the driver drought was very similar..a good six months before even common hardware was optimized enough to use (..for games ;) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldier1st Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 vista is not another windows me,windows me was very picky about hardware and it had unstable windows 98+windows 2000 code that's why it is total crap.for me during my testing vista has been very good,also vista has a better start than xp because ms learned from xp's problems,xp was horrible till sp1 and at sp2 it is awesome,if you think vista is crap then try it and see how you like it apart from the drm crap vista will be awesome but for now xp is the best choice for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoDEAN Posted July 21, 2007 Author Share Posted July 21, 2007 Enjoy this reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 Enjoy this reading A blog post? You have got to be kidding me. Everyone is going to have their own opinions on Vista but this one is just stupid. Microsoft is working on the next OS (Windows 7, articles on the front page) but that is years away. They aren't doing it because Vista is a "dud" but rather they want to get back on track with releasing OS's. Have you even really RAN Vista? I have been using it for over a year and the problems I have weren't due to Microsoft but rather hardware manufacturers not supporting it. IE: Acer Laptop doesn't know it has a battery, due to power management drivers FROM ACER. IE #2: ASRock Motherboard doesn't have drivers out for Vista. After install everything was detected but there is a slight issue with the network card driver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan- Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 Vista in no way is like ME. ME was one of those just quick through it out there type things. Mainly just being able to make money off of the whole "It's year 2000 ZOMG!" idea. Vista, as others have said, was in development for many years and it's not MS's fault that companies didn't take advantage of the Betas and RTM. Plus remember, XP wasn't perfect when it first came out either. So just be patient, Vista will end up very accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryster Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 Hehe, no one knows that better than me =PBut it was the same with Windows 2000, which had a long (very stable and complete) beta 3 and a long RC process. It still took a while for hardware OEMs and ISVs to get on-board and really support it. There was even a time when ATI insisted they would never support Windows 2000's GDI acceleration, for example :) Don't be so selective with your memory, even XP had the exact same problem with driver support for several weeks and months following its release, it was not exclusive to 2000 and Vista. To everyone else: Vista is rock solid on my system. I have been running it for over a year (I was in the Tech Beta program) and I haven't had a single OS crash yet. Now that the drivers are starting to catch up (shame on nVidia and Creative!) it's actually fairly quick and responsive too. I did have to disable Windows Search and Superfetch though, I cant stand endless disk thrashing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted July 21, 2007 Veteran Share Posted July 21, 2007 Don't be so selective with your memory, even XP had the exact same problem with driver support for several weeks and months following its release, it was not exclusive to 2000 and Vista. Windows XP uses the exact same driver model as Windows 2000... so no, it didn't have the same problem (other than people with crummy installers that hard-coded the OS version check, etc). To everyone else: Vista is rock solid on my system. I have been running it for over a year (I was in the Tech Beta program) and I haven't had a single OS crash yet. Now that the drivers are starting to catch up (shame on nVidia and Creative!) it's actually fairly quick and responsive too. I did have to disable Windows Search and Superfetch though, I cant stand endless disk thrashing. Windows Search shouldn't cause disk thrashing (exception being if it has to do a recovery operation after a crash, but that's pretty rare). What made you think Search was causing it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FATILA Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 That blog writer is living in a dream world with his saas predictions. Google apps for one have not done well in the enterprise at all, no matter what the hype says; and how do you get on the internet anyway? Maybe a flash based OS? Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solardog Posted July 21, 2007 Share Posted July 21, 2007 IMHO, Vista is more like Win2000. Following that logic, the next release might be more akin to XP. Of course, it's way too early to say if that will really be the case. That feels about right to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1759 Posted July 22, 2007 Share Posted July 22, 2007 These Vista-bashing threads make everyone dumber for having read them... Having said that, going from 2000 to XP was worse than going from XP to Vista. And most of the Vista bashing I still think stems from the Vista betas, which were horrible and felt like ME all over again, but have never bothered to use the RTM, which is a million times better, and a worthy improvement over XP. With the latest Nvidia drivers, all my games are working once again, and I've found proper Bluetooth audio drivers last week. As the months go on, Vista is only getting better. (although there are still some bugs that need to be fixed, like the folder view setting not sticking) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chosen One Posted July 22, 2007 Share Posted July 22, 2007 :rofl: Oh man, thanks, I needed a good laugh.Anybody who says Vista is like ME has no clue what he/she is talking about. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharpGreen Posted July 22, 2007 Share Posted July 22, 2007 :rofl: Oh man, thanks, I needed a good laugh.Anybody who says Vista is like ME has no clue what he/she is talking about. Anybody who says Vista SP1 is nothing but security updates, also has no clue what he/she is talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak_power Posted July 23, 2007 Share Posted July 23, 2007 It's not that big jump from XP to Vista as it was from Windows 98 to 2000. Vista just need more system resources then XP. Also, games and apps will be coded around new security features in Vista and DX10.0 api and everything will be in a place. I think the next Windows is just gonna be like what XP was to 2000. They will have the same driver model etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoDEAN Posted July 24, 2007 Author Share Posted July 24, 2007 Two reports out today (7/24) from PC manufactures saying in so many words "vista isn't all that." Think a lot of people in this forum are living in denial. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathachew Veteran Posted July 24, 2007 Veteran Share Posted July 24, 2007 Two reports out today (7/24) from PC manufactures saying in so many words "vista isn't all that."Think a lot of people in this forum are living in denial. Oh well. I don't think I'm the one in denial here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obraxis Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 Windows Vista is not Windows ME. It's Windows ME 2 ;) But seriously, it's not that bad of an OS. Except it wont install on my 'Vista capable' PC, it doesn't support year-old hardware and the fact it brings nothing significant to the end-user is besides the point. These issues will mostly be fixed in time with Vista SP1 and SP2. My problem is, why give the end-user so much grief. They said that ending all backwards compatibility and creating a totally new OS would hurt people. I'm starting to wonder if it wouldn't have been a better idea if MS had just written an OS from scratch for a change. They've certainly had enough time to do so. Windows Vista is at it's bare bones Windows NT. An OS that has been around for a decade. Can we have a PROPER new OS...please MS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigapixels Veteran Posted July 24, 2007 Veteran Share Posted July 24, 2007 Two reports out today (7/24) from PC manufactures saying in so many words "vista isn't all that."Think a lot of people in this forum are living in denial. Oh well. :rofl: So PC manufacturers are the de facto experts on the subject? I wish I'd known this before. /sarcasm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordkanin Posted July 24, 2007 Share Posted July 24, 2007 . I'm starting to wonder if it wouldn't have been a better idea if MS had just written an OS from scratch for a change. Doing something like that would take ages. Every modern OS there has been built upon years and years of its previous versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts