Windows Vista is 'Half Baked'

[NEVER85]

I know an enterprise business that's refusing to move to Vista.... Approx 100,000 computers.

Also looking to move to OpenOffice too!

That doesn't surprise me. Even with volume licensing, upgrading 100,000 computers to Vista would be a very expensive procedure. I run my own business and I have several computers all running Vista, but hey, that's just me. ;)

[murderdoll]

Please, if you're praising Vista give reasons, not just "Oh XP is old let's face it" or "It's better and more reliable" as if XP is not reliable or something. I'm glad I tried both and I sticked to XP. Some might ask why, it's because I found nothing to make me keep Vista, everything I need is in XP and I felt that XP is faster, so why!

Edited June 2, 2008 by murderdoll

[HawkMan]

Please, if you're praising Vista give reasons, not just "Oh XP is old let's face it" or "It's better and more reliable" as if XP is not reliable or something. I'm glad I tried both and I sticked to XP.

Wehre's your reasons ? I see one half reasonin your post at best.

meanwhile with Vista you get

-Faster Acelerted GUI

-Nicer GUI (though subjective)

-indexed search integrated with explorer and the start menu

- expanding on the previus, saved smart folders

-much better memory handling

-readyboost

-superfetch

-DX10 if you game

-Awesome fully integrated voice control, with the best voice recognition I've seen yet, beating expensive "pro" packages.

-Experience Index wich makes it a lot easier for the less experienced to check and know what their computer can handle when shopping for games or software.

-USer space graphics driver.

-new sound architecture.

and through requirements for driver signatures by MS it's also helping withthe adoption of 64bit and availability of 64 bit drivers.

it is also more stable than XP, not that I had any stability problems with XP, but with Vista it's even better. And I have had no reasons to switch back, I've been gaming and using it actively since RTM and slightly before, and haven't had any real performance losses. The only think I miss is the up button in explorer, that's pretty much it.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Marketing a 32bit version was a major fail.

Why is that. Was everyone that was using a 32bit PC supposed to go out and buy new PC's just to run Vista? I am currently using a 32bit version of Vista Business. I have never had a BSOD, I never had to do a re install, it has never crashed. I beta tested Vista and I personally thought that some of the Beta releases were superior to the final release.

[The Scarecrow]

I disagree on "Half-baked". I have been using it on two machines since March 07 and have had zero problems. XP always gave me problems even on its release. I work for a major big ten university and my department is moving to it now. We have found in our testing that we reduce the number of spyware that the machines get vs XP. The users are not as able to install apps like in XP where some apps install without admin rights. We are also able to control the users account much more effective than with XP.

All those that want justification for a company changing, please. I have to deal with the university computing center and all the hoops they have. Most of them are idiots and have no idea what IT stands for. From my experience most IT groups in companies don't want to change to a new OS cause it takes work to get it all set up and going. Most are creature of habits and something new it just to much for them. Its like the ones that like to blame the OS instead of the 3rd party drivers which is what most of Vista problems are not the OS. Don't even get me started how wrong the Apple ads are, although funny are very wrong.

[Echilon]

I've been using Vista since RTM, and now have it installed on two of my machines. No problems so far.

[embj]

I would say that I have to disagree...I've been using Vista ever since it went to RTM in November of '06, and I love it. It has been extremely stable except for a few kinks here and there. However, ever since SP1 was released, I haven't had a single problem out of it. I upgraded my main rig from x86 to x64 almost 2 months ago (will be two months as of tomorrow), and it has been running great, as well. I didn't initially go with x64 because drivers were still being developed, which caused a lot of my stuff to not work right.

I find Vista to be a much more stable platform than XP. I've had this computer up and running with daily usage for the past 56 days (just installed it 59 days ago), and it's still running just as great as the day I booted it up. With XP, it would be doing crazy things after about 20 days. I'm not saying that XP isn't great, I just find Vista to work a bit better.

The one thing that I love about Vista for a business environment is UAC. With administrative UAC enabled, it has stopped spyware and any other malicious software in its tracks. If somebody needs something to be installed, I have to be the one to install it. It makes for a lot easier management.

[Circaflex]

I think people are scared of change. Fact is Vista was better at RTM than XP was. It took XP ~ 7 years to get where it is now, Vista has been out for a little of a year. Vista is fine, most problems people are having is due to third party driver support, which isnt MS's fault.

[ehlo]

I'd agree that Vista is half baked. Applications do run a lot faster if you have a decent amount of ram though.

The problem (atleast for me) is the shoddy Vista interface.

For example clicking the volume control tray icon to open the volume mixer. You shouldn't have to double click mixer. And why is mixer even coming up 'hyperlink style' and not as a proper button?

The same issue with getting the network connections explorer window. You have to open the network and sharing centre as an extra step which is unnecessarily complicated.

[-=Outlaw=-]

i got one thing on my wishlist. i wish people would stop makin these kinds of threads lol. vista this vista that.

vista is a better operating sytem than xp i liked xp and i have both on my pc. but i never log into it

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

To the OP, why must you start regurgitating this crap again?

I haven't had any problems with Vista - and that's on my 4-yr-old Dell, albeit with hardware changes (but that's *before* I installed Vista Beta 2 in May 2006).

I recommend ...... oh never mind.

[anonymous_user]

Was everyone that was using a 32bit PC supposed to go out and buy new PC's just to run Vista?

Considering Vista's system requirements, many people would need a new computer anyways :laugh:

[majortom1981]

Considering Vista's system requirements, many people would need a new computer anyways :laugh:

hmm i have vista home premium with aero enabled on my parents p4 3ghz with 1gig of ram and its running beutifully. actually faster then xp.

Vistas main problem is buggy 3rd party drivers. Anybody having problems is probably using bad drivers.

[Iian K]

I disagree, Vista is just fine on moderate computers (considering both of my PC's are older).

I've not one issue since I got it mid-2006 during the beta. That tells you something.

and please, for Neowin's sake, can we please quit bashing Vista for some "crap" people don't like. It's rather annoying, and I can't help but read it.

[+Ryster Subscriber²]

The problem (atleast for me) is the shoddy Vista interface.

For example clicking the volume control tray icon to open the volume mixer. You shouldn't have to double click mixer. And why is mixer even coming up 'hyperlink style' and not as a proper button?

Since when does different equal shoddy? If you want an operating system that functions identically to Windows XP, then stay with Windows XP. No-one is forcing you to upgrade to Vista.

For the record, it takes an IDENTICAL number of clicks to get the volume mixer up in Vista than it does in XP. You don't have to double click on the Mixer link. Just single click the speaker icon, then single click Mixer.

Finally: If the worst you've got to complain about in Vista is "Mixer" being a link rather than a button, then Vista is actually doing rather well.

I do agree with the network connections part of your post though, all I want is to be able to get to see my network connections, and right click on Local Area Connection to check/change IP settings, etc... I don't want to see some fluffy network and sharing centre that tells me nothing.

Edited June 5, 2008 by TCLN Ryster

[cbosdell]

I personally am overall pleased and enjoy using Vista however my work (with about ~600 computers) is sticking with XP until Windows 7 most likely. In fact a large number of the computers are still on Windows 2000 (I was just upgraded from 2000 to XP two month ago on my work machine).

They really don't see any advantages for Vista or Office 2007. even though I do. They probably see the advantages to office but the new interface with no "classic" option makes the learning curve too steep to be worth it yet.

[revvo]

Is Vista half baked? Nah

While Vista doesn't offer much over XP and does very little to justify you to upgrade your current XP copy to Vista, with the right amount of RAM and a good video card, it's just a better, shiny XP with some new features and some taken from Server 2003.

In the end, XP was a fisher-price looking version of Windows 2000 geared to the consumers. I guess the difference with XP is there was a compelling reason to upgrade: Most home consumers had 98/98SE so moving away from the dos kernel to the NT kernel was the way to go. With the right drivers, even before SP1, XP was miles ahead of 98/98SE (but not Windows 2000) as far as stability goes.

[Dc'1]

I disagree, I think Vista is a very good OS, better than XP. Some things annoy me, but I like it.

[ViperAFK]

Considering Vista's system requirements, many people would need a new computer anyways :laugh:

idk but pretty much everyone I know has a pc better than a 1 ghz p3 and 512 mb ram.

[nemo]

I'm happy with Vista.

I think some people should install the original Windows XP (pre-SP1), and come back and post their feelings.

[roadgeek9]

I used to use Vista, because of performance problems. But I wouldn't call it "half-baked."

I currently use XP, mainly just because my computer is a little too old to run Vista. My view is that your computer should have at least a sticker that says "Designed for Windows XP, Vista Capable." My computer was purchased just a few months before that, so it only says "Designed for Windows XP," so I am staying with XP.

[Matrix XII]

Disagree - People have been way too hard on Vista. XP isn't the OS to put on a pedestal, yes it was/is good but people have way too high of expectations these days I find. Operating systems have to be patched along the way, that's how it was, and how it will be. You can't make a perfect OS upon release.

[HawkMan]

I'm happy with Vista.

I think some people should install the original Windows XP (pre-SP1), and come back and post their feelings.

Why are you replying to a topic where the last post was in june ?

[svnO.o]

I'd say it is half-baked though I still prefer it over any other OS out right now (not counting Windows 7). There are obviously things that they weren't able to do that they should have done if they had had the time. Overall I think it is a solid OS though. Vista 64 bit really shines on a modern machine.

[Mathachew Veteran]

Another one of these? Really? No, I don't find it half baked. I wouldn't go back to XP if you were willing to pay me.