Microsoft looks to 'Mojave' to revive Vista's image


Recommended Posts

Reading comprehension is off the scale in this thread. They weren't "critics", they were average, run-of-the-mill users that thought they knew a lot more about something than they actually did. You know...that sounds a lot like...the people...posting...here..?

True. Many of the features of Vista can easily be added to XP as well. I can make XP look and act exactly like Vista. Vista was not the big change that XP was from the 9.x line. At this point I don't really care if Vista is finally working as it should have from the start. Its far too late even though at first I had actually wanted to like Vista.

You can make XP look like Vista---except the graphics won't be hardware-accelerated through Dwm, and will run slower---while in Vista, running aero should make Windows run faster. I don't think you get it.

i use vista daily, i respect it but i don't always recommend it. the 20% give or take loss of performance in games and there's nothing else to do except blame microsoft since there's no resolution or reason or point to it. so in some ways yeah fine it does the jobs has a few perks but also has as many down sides to it as much as perks so it's like why spoon feed people what they don't want and as much money you can pour into marketing and trying to change peoples minds they should be pouring it into fixing it so it doesn't have so many adverse effects to what people want.

Not really true about the gaming performance loss:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2303830,00.asp

benchmark tests on a brand new top of the line system is different from varying setups and whats now considered legacy hardware and individual experience. i myself experience 75% loss of performance in most games compared to xp which plays them fine under vista my system struggles to get a steady smooth framerate which obviously says enough for my experience and others i know who don't have core 2 duo or quad new systems who can play games fine on xp but under vista just turns games to power point presentations and not everyone has or is able to upgrade and have systems capable of running games under xp which is what they want and need and they bag microsoft cause you get molasses quality gaming under vista. i'm not talk really old systems i'm talking last 2-3 year old and were top of line back then.

benchmark tests on a brand new top of the line system is different from varying setups and whats now considered legacy hardware and individual experience. i myself experience 75% loss of performance in most games compared to xp which plays them fine under vista my system struggles to get a steady smooth framerate which obviously says enough for my experience and others i know who don't have core 2 duo or quad new systems who can play games fine on xp but under vista just turns games to power point presentations and not everyone has or is able to upgrade and have systems capable of running games under xp which is what they want and need and they bag microsoft cause you get molasses quality gaming under vista. i'm not talk really old systems i'm talking last 2-3 year old and were top of line back then.

Graphics card manufacturers have very little incentive to support their legacy hardware on a new operating system. By the time they'd get it optimized to the same point as XP, the cards would be obsolete.

It makes sense that the further back you go, the wider the gap between the two operating systems becomes. On newer hardware, Vista and XP have virtually indistinguishable gaming performance.

i myself experience 75% loss of performance in most games compared to xp which plays them fine under vista my system struggles to get a steady smooth framerate

You are definitely having an odd situation there. Gaming performance should be very much on par. What type of card do you have, and how old are the drivers for it?

I was just about to make the exact same comment but you beat me to it! :D At least I tried (and tried, and tried) Vista repeatedly before I decided I didn't like it. Though I admit i've been using Vista x64 at work for a few weeks now and it's a huge improvement over my previous experiences. I'd never ever slam a product without trying it - it just makes you sound like an idiot.

However quite frankly I still begrudge horsepower to get it to that point though if i'm honest! I've setup a pair of disks into a RAID0 to get some decent disk speed and stuck in 4GB of RAM! For an OS!!! We still only ever spec out our application & DB servers with 4GB and they run superbly!

Maybe you don't slam a product immediately, but you have to understand that most people do. It's in many people, the idea of just "fitting in". In reality, trying to do so just gets you to look like a ignorant moron.

It's disgusting, really, and I hate Apple for making it seem like a good thing.. The "I'm a Mac" ads? I thought the first few were funny, but as new ones kept coming, it was more and more obvious to spot Apple's lies embedded in them.

People used to blame Microsoft for such a thing, and Apple was king. Today, same story switched. No problem though, when/if the Mac userbase passes 15%, people will see the difference in that it really isn't as claimed.

But I'm no fan of either of the companies, I just dislike the constant BS that floats around. But hey, that's marketing, right?

...

i myself experience 75% loss of performance in most games compared to xp which plays them fine under vista my system struggles to get a steady smooth framerate

...

There's something else going on then, that shouldn't be happening.

In my case, I actually got a performance increase by moving to Vista.

There's something else going on then, that shouldn't be happening.

In my case, I actually got a performance increase by moving to Vista.

That is what I was going to suggest also. Depending on your system, a lot of people I have talked to have seen increases due to their move to Vista. Hence why I am installing Vista Ultimate on my computer I'm building next week.

There's something else going on then, that shouldn't be happening.

In my case, I actually got a performance increase by moving to Vista.

Strange. I had Vista on my PC but it just become so slow and sluggish that I had to switch back to XP to experience my first fastest responsive system I've ever seen since having ran Vista for 2 years. I can play games that under vista wouldn't even run. I tried Quake 4 in Vista and it wouldn't register as a high settings by default and ran at extremely low 640-800 and low quality settings, but after repeating the installation on XP, I am able to get extreme high and large resolution on Quake 4 without any framerate drops.

Wrong response. This is not Vista, it's Server 2008. Vista SP1 is not the same crap filled buggy Vista RTM from 18 months ago. Yeah, of course it looks better now.

Yeah, except not.

A large number of the problems in Vista are caused by the ID-Ten-T error. This is a layer 8 category problem that really doesn't have a reasonable solution. ;)
A large number of the problems in Vista are caused by the ID-Ten-T error. This is a layer 8 category problem that really doesn't have a reasonable solution. ;)

:yes:

And what's more, is the idiots claiming that SP1 solved all sorts of problems. They have no idea what they're talking about, obviously. SP1 contained NOTHING new in the way of bug fixes, as it was simply a roll-up of all the fixes to that point. SP1 was essentially marketing, nothing more.

Microsoft should do what Apple does.

Add some new features here and there, give it a new name, put it in a nice looking package, charge like $ 120.00 for it and advertise it as the "Most Advanced OS In The World".

That way they can leave the so devastated "Vista" name behind. :)

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!