Is Vista the new ME!

[+bomberh Subscriber²]

I tested Vista in Alpha, then Beta and finally got RTM. So I have been using it for some time.

I have been fairly impressed with it on the whole, but started to get a bit annoyed with it when Windows Explorer started to crash for no reason. (I know about the right click problems etc that may cause this) I turned off UAC and it appears to have gone away.

I have also noted that my games are crap in Vista, and this is the new stuff UT3, Crysis, Dirt etc. With the hardware I have (see sig) my games should fly, well they don?t. UT3 has started to crash on me for some reason and it is really annoying.

I do a lot of testing so I have a number of hard drives (SATA) and a caddie that I can interchange the drives.

Because of the annoying state of my games, I decided to put in a new hard drive and install Win XP. The install went very smoothly as I would expect. I installed all my games and configured them to the max. They all played great, everything worked, and the images were fantastic, frame rates were great, game play was just unbelievable and 100% better then Vista.

Now, is it just me or is Vista a bit of a dog?? Is it today?s version of ME which was equally poor at everything and had me reaching for my Win98 disks.

I didn?t think that Vista was going to be a pain and thought that it was going to be an improvement over XP, but even though Vista has its nice visuals, (just like ME spooky enough) it isn?t up to the job and XP would be a better bet. Even with the RTM SP1 installed in Vista, it works a little better, but nothing fantastic and quite honest a little disappointing. If this is the standard of the SP1, then all the people that MS want to move onto Vista, well they are not going to bother.

We had to wait for MS to get things right when they rushed out ME which was bad, very bad, because they thought that they needed something new. Well Vista appears to have been in the same vein, so should we be looking towards the next OS to come out of the door as this may be the next XP which we thought that Vista was going to be.

[Mathachew Veteran]

:sleep: Dejavu for the umpteenth time.

[Elliot B.]

Not another one of these topics :sleep:

[+bomberh Subscriber²]

Sorry guys, but just had to get it off my chest, sorry if it has been done recently.

[Elliot B.]

Sorry guys, but just had to get it off my chest, sorry if it has been done recently.

Recently? How about everyday since release? (in fact, before release)

[zeroday]

:sleep:

Sorry guys, but just had to get it off my chest, sorry if it has been done recently.

Try having a good cry that MS didnt release something upto your expectations.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Is it really worth my time reading what you've put if you can't manage to use a question mark for the topic header? You either don't understand punctuation or you didn't take the time to proof read your post. Not only that but is a different font / font size really necessary? To me that just makes what you've put less pleasant to read.

NEway, I used to be a fan of Vista because of features like search but even with the SP1 preview I find Vista too slow and unresponsive. I get crashes, explorer hangs if I right click on a shortcut to a program that doesn't exist, when I right click on a taskbar item to close it I often can't select any of the options and compatability / performance isn't great in the pro-audio sector (VST plugins, Cubase 4, etc). It's not an ME (as ME was merely 98 with a few icon changes) but it's not great either. It's disappointing because I really wanted to like Vista. I bought it upon release because I figured I'd only end up wanting / needing it down the line anyway, though I wasn't expecting Windows 7 so soon. Hopefully Vista users will get a cheaper upgrade to W7, in which case (providing it's better than Vista, which doesn't seem hard) I will upgrade ASAP - if it's worse I guess I'll have to stick with Vista because XP will be discontinued as soon as Microsoft can get away with it.

[shockz]

Is it really worth my time reading what you've put if you can't manage to use a question mark for the topic header? You either don't understand punctuation or you didn't take the time to proof read your post. Not only that but is a different font / font size really necessary? To me that just makes what you've put less pleasant to read.

Maybe I have to read this again... but are you seriously upset that he just used a different font?

[Fabian-]

Saying Vista is the new ME does not make you cool, contrary to popular belief :p

[1759]

Is this a question, or a statement?

No, Vista is not ME - ME didn't really bring forth anything new, whereas Vista has a 3d accelerated desktop, built-in search, and an improved driver model. Vista's biggest issue, is that it's very slow at file transfers, and it's also a memory pig. And I prefer Vista over XP at this point.

I don't care about games, but Crysis is a dog anyhow - it doesn't prove much, besides DX10 not proving out to be much of any advance over DX9.

The Vista/ME/XP thing has been done ad nauseum for a year. :sleep:

[majortom1981]

Vista is not the new Me. The difference between the two is that Me was just a complete mess. Vista is very succeptable to bad third party apps and drivers (adobe flash is a huge one). IF you can find good 3rd party apps you will not have any vista problems.

Microsoft needs to get off its butt and figure out why is it that third party apps and drivers can crash vista so easily .

[Elliot B.]

Is it really worth my time reading what you've put if you can't manage to use a question mark for the topic header? You either don't understand punctuation or you didn't take the time to proof read your post. Not only that but is a different font / font size really necessary? To me that just makes what you've put less pleasant to read.

NEway, I used to be a fan of Vista because of features like search but even with the SP1 preview I find Vista too slow and unresponsive. I get crashes, explorer hangs if I right click on a shortcut to a program that doesn't exist, when I right click on a taskbar item to close it I often can't select any of the options and compatability / performance isn't great in the pro-audio sector (VST plugins, Cubase 4, etc). It's not an ME (as ME was merely 98 with a few icon changes) but it's not great either. It's disappointing because I really wanted to like Vista. I bought it upon release because I figured I'd only end up wanting / needing it down the line anyway, though I wasn't expecting Windows 7 so soon. Hopefully Vista users will get a cheaper upgrade to W7, in which case (providing it's better than Vista, which doesn't seem hard) I will upgrade ASAP - if it's worse I guess I'll have to stick with Vista because XP will be discontinued as soon as Microsoft can get away with it.

You are so wrong there. It was 98 with some of the features of 2000 including System Restore, System File Protection, a new TCI/IP stack, UPnP support, WIA inclusion, Automatic Updates, Compressed Folders, an Image Preview system, built-in USB mass storage drivers, the System Configuration Utility etc.

It was the basis (albeit shaky basis) to what XP became.

[Lasker]

Windows XP was buggy until SP2 then XP became smooth, Vista does not have yet his first SP1 and everybody is complaining about it. Wait for SP1 and then tell us your experience.

[Elliot B.]

Windows XP was buggy until SP2 then XP became smooth, Vista does not have yet his first SP1 and everybody is complaining about it. Wait for SP1 and then tell us your experience.

RTM was fine, SP1 made it better and yeh, SP2 made XP excellent for everyday-use. SP3 will make XP an excellent package, but everyone is (or at least will be) switching to Vista soon.

[ViperAFK]

"Is Vista the new ME?"

No.

Calling vista MEII is a ridiculous thing and I wish people would stop throwing this crap around. Vista has a lot of important changes under the hood, like much more advanced memory management, rewritten audio/network stack, Much improved dual core support ect.. It also has UAC making it much more secure. The interface overhaul is also good, no more ugly tearing windows and random graphical artifacts/inconsistencies and it looks more fluid and responsive. Also vista has been very stable for me (Besides when I made it BSOD a couple times OCing, but my fault and not vista's). 64 bit vista is also MUCH better than 64 bit XP.

Sure vista isn't perfect, it is slow on low spec computers, may have some compatibility issues, and driver problems, but overall I think it is a decent OS. I am really looking forward to Windows 7.

[bl4ck5un]

Godsake, NO.

Move on seriously, same old story.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Maybe I have to read this again... but are you seriously upset that he just used a different font?

Upset? Of course not. Do I think it was unnecessay and unhelpful? Yes.

If Microsoft were to give Vista a serious speed up, even at the cost of some features (or performance of certain features like search), then it could be a decent OS. Feature wise it is fine - they just need to trim back UAC, improve file transfers (still too slow) and fix explorer performance / reliability. It's great that explorer restarts itself promptly when there is a problem but it shouldn't happen, particularly not when I'm using it normally. Considering that Vista is supposedly optimised to make use of RAM and multicore processors it's very disappointing for performance to be worse than XP. The situation is also not helped by Microsoft failing to deliver on Ultimate Extras, as Microsoft still recommends to check back "regularly" for more updates. It's pathetic. They should be chucking out loads of Ultimate Extras to make up for Vista's shortcomings, not releasing none!

[Lt-DavidW]

No. ME was s***.

[BoDEAN]

I tested Vista in Alpha, then Beta and finally got RTM. So I have been using it for some time.

I have been fairly impressed with it on the whole, but started to get a bit annoyed with it when Windows Explorer started to crash for no reason. (I know about the right click problems etc that may cause this) I turned off UAC and it appears to have gone away.

I have also noted that my games are crap in Vista, and this is the new stuff UT3, Crysis, Dirt etc. With the hardware I have (see sig) my games should fly, well they don?t. UT3 has started to crash on me for some reason and it is really annoying.

I do a lot of testing so I have a number of hard drives (SATA) and a caddie that I can interchange the drives.

Because of the annoying state of my games, I decided to put in a new hard drive and install Win XP. The install went very smoothly as I would expect. I installed all my games and configured them to the max. They all played great, everything worked, and the images were fantastic, frame rates were great, game play was just unbelievable and 100% better then Vista.

Now, is it just me or is Vista a bit of a dog?? Is it today?s version of ME which was equally poor at everything and had me reaching for my Win98 disks.

I didn?t think that Vista was going to be a pain and thought that it was going to be an improvement over XP, but even though Vista has its nice visuals, (just like ME spooky enough) it isn?t up to the job and XP would be a better bet. Even with the RTM SP1 installed in Vista, it works a little better, but nothing fantastic and quite honest a little disappointing. If this is the standard of the SP1, then all the people that MS want to move onto Vista, well they are not going to bother.

We had to wait for MS to get things right when they rushed out ME which was bad, very bad, because they thought that they needed something new. Well Vista appears to have been in the same vein, so should we be looking towards the next OS to come out of the door as this may be the next XP which we thought that Vista was going to be.

Old NEWS!

How many times do we need to start pointless topics like this? Go home.

[theyarecomingforyou]

You are so wrong there. It was 98 with some of the features of 2000 including System Restore, System File Protection, a new TCI/IP stack, UPnP support, WIA inclusion, Automatic Updates, Compressed Folders, an Image Preview system, built-in USB mass storage drivers, the System Configuration Utility etc.

It was the basis (albeit shaky basis) to what XP became.

Oh please, you make it sound like a compelling upgrade. It wasn't. I bought the upgrade on release and it hung on first install... it didn't get much better from there on. It didn't include DX8 as Microsoft had promised (it was pulled at the last minute), which was one of the biggest cons. System restore was the best feature in it, with the new icons being the most prominent feature. However, there were all sorts of driver issues and compability problems and I actually went back to using 98SE. You can try to justify it all you want but it had barely any new features and introduced many problems.

Vista has a lot more compelling features to upgrade for - DX10 (not as good as hyped), Complete PC Backup (Ultimate only), search (start menu and explorer), Aero, security (though UAC is still a work in progress), sidebar (though because of general poor performance I dare not leave it enabled), kernel changes (hidden but more significant than 98 to ME), driver model (and updates for new hardware via the internet). So Vista has a lot more to offer than ME ever did but it also has a loss of issues, mostly relating to performance and UAC.

[Hell_Of_Doom]

Eventually Vista will be replaced by Windows 7 in 2009. By that time most companies wont adapt Vista neither good deal of home users. I guess it is Windows ME in a sense of life span. I think nobody is going to talk about Vista next year in Spring. I had Vista running for 8 months and I reverted back to Windows XP X64 Edition. Vista isn't bad but it didn't offer me anything worth over XP for sake of performance penalty i was having in games. For example UT3 runs terrible under Vista unlike XP. It's hard to even know till you actually move back to XP and then you realize how much Vista is slower.

Vista is stable OS but everything else is not for me. That's my deal...i guess other people have their reasons.

[notuptome2004]

i myself will stick with windows vista ultimate but will test before or when it is out on someones system Windows 7 but i may not use it right away as well vista runs just fine for me now and has plenty of Rope to go before the end of the spool

[Lord Nite]

I have 3 computers in my house, with 2 running XP Pro SP2, and the other running Vista Ultimate. I have not had any problems on the Vista machine, and I actually like it better than XP. Will I switch my main box to Vista? Maybe after SP1 comes out, and I've had time to test on the Vista machine.

As for Vista being MEII...that is a completely ridiculous claim. The reason alot of people are having problems in Vista is because of driver and application makers. Vista runs very smoothly for me, and I have yet to encounter any kind of error that involved Vista itself.

Please let these types of threads just die, and quit making new ones because your experience isn't great with Vista.

[Andrew Lyle Global Moderator]

oh wow... another one. It doesn't matter how many times you dig up the dead, it's still dead and gone. Give it up already :no:

[roadgeek9]

XP was pretty sucky until SP1 came out, then it started to work pretty well. SP3 Beta is a little broken, but the only problem I noticed was networking. On the other hand, Vista seems to run well on computers that came with it, but it seems to run pretty poorly on my 2 and a half year old laptop with a 1.7 GHz CPU and 1.5 GB RAM.