CNet rates Vista one of "worst products in history"


Recommended Posts

Can someone please enlighten me as to why Vista (post updates) is not a mature product?

Because a lot of people who don't own Vista, or can't afford it, or don't want to spend the ten seconds it would take to learn about its new features and how to use them properly automatically want to make themselves feel better by saying it's ****. It's so much easier to say something is garbage then ignore it, than it is to actually use it, get used to it, and appreciate its new features.

Most of these people are, coincidentally enough, absolute morons when it comes to tech stuff. CNet included.

All i can say is lets face it any microsoft OS that comes out will recieve negative attention. Its true every OS they have put out has had some complain one way or the other.

That's because Microsoft's hype machine raises expectations too much. Let's not forget "The wow starts now!" :whistle:

true the wow was not as big, but also remember most of us here saw the potential for vista and didnt see the wow in the final product, but for the average consumer the wow was that they had to adjust to the change in vista, if they had used the original longhorn model people would be too confused.

Why do you think Microsoft is releasing Windows 7 in 2010 instead of 2013 or 2014?

Windows 3.1(93)

Windows 95

Windows 98

Windows 2000

Windows ME

Windows XP(01)

Vista (2007)

Vista is the exception, not the rule. Why does this have to pointed out everytime one of these reviews is posted?

Windows 3.1(93)

Windows 95

Windows 98

Windows 2000

Windows ME

Windows XP(01)

Vista (2007)

Vista is the exception, not the rule. Why does this have to pointed out everytime one of these reviews is posted?

Very good point.

This is strange. I don't think I am ready to upgrade to vista yet. I just built a new computer and I am going to stick with XP I guess.

That's too bad, your new PC will likely run Vista just fine, unless you went cheap with bottom of the barrel hardware and thought 1GB of RAM was more than enough.

The average PC back in late 2001 was something like a 1.8Ghz Pentium 4 w/128MB RAM. When these machines were running XP, of course they were going to be much slower than running Windows Me. People bitched and complained.

Now this average is a dual core processor, most likely 2.8Ghz or something with 1GB RAM. In two years time, when the specs are 4Ghz 'Intel Whatevers' w/4GB RAM then Vista will be flying just the same as XP. Not that everybody here already knows this - but some people just forget.

I'm running Vista on a 5-year-old P4 Northwood 2.66Ghz w/1GB RAM and its doing absolutely fine. The only crashes I have encountered are when I've been screwing around with overclocking.

That's too bad, your new PC will likely run Vista just fine, unless you went cheap with bottom of the barrel hardware and thought 1GB of RAM was more than enough.

Vista runs fine for me with 1 GB. I was able to record a show in MCE and play a game (Advent Rising) and the recording played fine.

I will get more ram because now the prices are just too damn good not to get any, deals every weekend :D

i respect your opinion, but i can't agree with you, its the worst OS i have ever used

Obviously you never used Windows 2000 before SP3ish in a non-businessy envionment. Or XP when it came out.....

Though, I think the OSes were pretty good, the fault lied in vendors being crappy. Still, they were pretty bad to use. I shunned XP for a while.

Edited by MioTheGreat
Obviously you never used Windows 2000 before SP3ish in a non-businessy envionment. Or XP when it came out.....

Though, I think the OSes were pretty good, the fault lied in vendors being crappy. Still, they were pretty bad to use. I shunned XP for a while.

i used them both and enjoyed them a lot more then vista so far. the potential for vista is there, it's just not "ready" yet for me.

I am staying with XP until the next version of Windows, if that's a repeat of Vista i'm going Mac.

It will be, because just about every Windows before it has been. Then again, Leopard has been a 'repeat of Vista' too so I guess you're screwed no matter who you run to.

Windows 3.1(93)

Windows 95

Windows 98

Windows 2000

Windows ME

Windows XP(01)

Vista (2007)

Vista is the exception, not the rule. Why does this have to pointed out everytime one of these reviews is posted?

3.1, 98, ME, XP are not major revisions. 95, 2000, Vista and supposedly Windows 7 are...

I would never go back to Windows XP. Vista is just fantastic here, and I haven't yet had a total system crash under Vista whereas I often did on XP.

Yes, it has niggling issues (file copy/move :whistle: ), but otherwise it's a damn good OS.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AMD is supported out of the box in linux because of their open source driver. Nvidia does not. All my systems are amd and all of them work nicely on linux arch without doing anything.
    • Never had a problem with TPM and started using that many years ago in Win10. Through several motherboards and OS versions, it just does what it does without complaint. My games library doesn't even know it's there. Secure boot does a lot more than support anti-cheat, as it came along long before anti-cheat software. I've used it religiously since before I started using TPM, and I always liked it for being able to nullify virus contagions that try their best to come in underneath the firmware during boot, so that the OS doesn't see them, etc. That is its purpose, imo. I'll never understand why people who elect to use another OS feel compelled to run down Windows... I guess they need to do that to feel secure about their choices? I run Windows because it supports all the software (including games) natively that I want to buy, and I've never had to run down another OS to make me feel better about it. (Although it's certainly possible to do that, of course...) Win10 is on a ventilator atm, and Win11 is very close to being free, and I finally got to stop running StartAllBack as I moved to the Experimental/Dev channel and my 26300.8553 build supports the moveable taskbar and it's running fine at the top of the screen! Finally, my last major dislike of Win11 is being rectified! So, I'm not at all surprised to see Win11's share of the Steam survey hitting 70%.
    • I can answer about the Linux bit. I only used AMD GPUs. I currently have a 9060XT (8GB) that fits my needs, I'm not a gamer, so I don't need that much GDDR. But lately, NVIDIA has grown a lot in the recent years. Oh, the horrors of NVIDIA drivers not working. But they have been getting better. I know a lot of members onm here that are running cachyOS and other distros, and are fine with a 4090/5090 variants. Really, though, I would stick with AMD variants.
    • Everything they say you can already do yourself on the registry by changing some things.
    • Artist's renderings are so much nicer to view than the real thing, don't you think?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      252
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!