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

    • Guess it's one of those things best used by devs to thoroughly test stuff.
    • is it all upside down there? traffic lights reverted too?
    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • 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
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!