There is Nothing Wrong with Vista

[markwolfe Veteran]

Sorry Mark, I must disagree to some extent with you here. I do agree that there should be options in OSX to allow it to be dumbed down so that it can run on systems with less than 2GB of RAM and slower CPUs than 866? MHZ.. But Apple is a hardware company and they pretty much want to sell their latest hardware, I can understand their logic.. It doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

...

I don't think we disagree at all. Your example of Apple is a good one. Yes, they ought to be compared to a variety of OSes, and have the ability to choose the best solutions for them. But I never said that I think that all OSes ought to implement every idea to make them all have the same features.

Yes, it would be nice for OSX to have a stripped-down UI option, but it clearly does not meet Apple's business needs. I do think Microsoft would be able to benefit more, since they aren't as tied into hardware sales for profit.

I wasn't advocating that all OS solutions must contain the same feature sets. Sorry if that wasn't clear in my earlier post.

[MMaster23]

So, because Linux is much more flexible in configuring, allowing a user to downsize his or her OS resource footprint, you think it should not even be used to feature compare?

How about the other way? Wouldn't it be nice if Vista allowed users to elect a UI that consumed half the resources? Sort of like a Home Basic, but trimming the UI a bit more without the other limitations Microsoft plants into HB to make it less appealing, feature-wise. This isn't saying that Microsoft should open up its software to third parties or be Open Source. Just an alternative "low resource" option provided by Microsoft at no penalty of removing other features.

Linux leverages good ideas from Microsoft and Apple. Why can't Microsoft leverage this good idea from Linux? Certainly they can (and do) leverage other good ideas from each other already. ;)

Very true sir, very true. I would love to see an advanced option during installation on demand just like Windows 98 and OSX have. A small little customize button to choose own set of choices. However I can also understand why they didn't include it (and why they prob. won't include it in Windows 7) and that's mostly down to generalization of Vista system. I can say for certain that every stock Vista has Windows Mail and Remote Desktop Connection Client. If we were to give the user the choice to remove it, supporting the system will be harder (not saying hard or impossible, just no easier). With Vista you have a known set of tools which makes supporting and learning the system that much more easier.

Of course Linux "steals" from Microsoft, but so does Microsoft. No vendor thinks up technology exclusively. Nearly every feature in larger-scale systems have been copied from or are copied themselves. There are very little unique innovations from any system / vendor. And that's OK. If they didn't, we would have very unique yet very basic system that won't play nice to each other.

ps. Mark, I do think you can compare features but not stability and performance which was the main focus of my post.

True, but what about efficiency?

Why couldnt Vista's system requirements be half or three quarters of what it is now?

Yes, I do agree in sense that one could debate that the req. may be a bit too harsch.

I said in my post:

"Sure one could debate how much newer the hardware should be in order to run the newer software, but just don't expect your age old system to run it perfectly."

[markwolfe Veteran]

...

ps. Mark, I do think you can compare features but not stability and performance which was the main focus of my post.

...

I think that Vista (and even XP) are very stable products, overall. In the past, I would have given the nod to *nix for stability without needing to think twice. These days, you can build a powerful stable foundation on either platform easy. Microsoft brought NT to the masses with XP, and that was a good thing, but they neglected all the stuff that made it secure until they released Vista. Vista is benchmark-worthy to compare against the best that Apple and Linux (et al) have to offer. :yes:

[MMaster23]

I think that Vista (and even XP) are very stable products, overall. In the past, I would have given the nod to *nix for stability without needing to think twice. These days, you can build a powerful stable foundation on either platform easy. Microsoft brought NT to the masses with XP, and that was a good thing, but they neglected all the stuff that made it secure until they released Vista. Vista is benchmark-worthy to compare against the best that Apple and Linux (et al) have to offer. :yes:

True but what I'm saying there is no *nix. There are countless of combinations of OSS sofware that make up very different distros. So one should see Linux as one Linux. One should always compare Windows/OSX to distros.

I'm not saying Linux isn't worthy to compare it to the big boys. I'm just saying it often isn't done right/fair.

[markwolfe Veteran]

"Distro A" to Vista comparisons are fair. But it is equally fair to counter-compare "Distro B" to Vista and such. It is admittedly difficult to directly compare "Linux" (which really is just a kernel) to Vista or other Microsoft product. And I think that is one thing that makes it a little difficult for Microsoft to fight Linux.

In the words of John McCain, "It's like trying to nail Jello to a wall" :laugh:

[MMaster23]

"Distro A" to Vista comparisons are fair. But it is equally fair to counter-compare "Distro B" to Vista and such. It is admittedly difficult to directly compare "Linux" (which really is just a kernel) to Vista or other Microsoft product. And I think that is one thing that makes it a little difficult for Microsoft to fight Linux.

In the words of John McCain, "It's like trying to nail Jello to a wall" :laugh:

Or vice versa as opinions within the OSS community often differ.

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

Congrats, Scorbing. You finally matured.

I hope many Vista bashers would follow your path and grow up also.

Frankly, I'm about as patient with the Vista bashers as a little kid going "gimme gimme gimme" at a candy store.

(Hmm that's not bad of a quote I thought up ;) )

[Scorbing]

Congrats, Scorbing. You finally matured.

I hope many Vista bashers would follow your path and grow up also.

Frankly, I'm about as patient with the Vista bashers as a little kid going "gimme gimme gimme" at a candy store.

(Hmm that's not bad of a quote I thought up ;) )

LOL :p

[episode]

I have no doubt that it runs fast. That I agree. But what's funny is that I buy a pre-installed XP Dell computer and no problems occurred. Yeah, XP did have issues but it was once in a blue moon. Now, I buy a pre-installed Vista Dell computer and I experience various types of issues all the time. Funny world, ain't it?

Just because it was a new computer doesn't mean the problems aren't related to your computer and not Vista. Bad memory, bad HD, etc. Have you checked anything like that besides just blaming vista?

[Foub]

So, because Linux is much more flexible in configuring, allowing a user to downsize his or her OS resource footprint, you think it should not even be used to feature compare?

How about the other way? Wouldn't it be nice if Vista allowed users to elect a UI that consumed half the resources? Sort of like a Home Basic, but trimming the UI a bit more without the other limitations Microsoft plants into HB to make it less appealing, feature-wise. This isn't saying that Microsoft should open up its software to third parties or be Open Source. Just an alternative "low resource" option provided by Microsoft at no penalty of removing other features.

Linux leverages good ideas from Microsoft and Apple. Why can't Microsoft leverage this good idea from Linux? Certainly they can (and do) leverage other good ideas from each other already. ;)

Well, wasn't DOS really a pirated version of Unix that Gates sold to IBM 30 years ago? :whistle:

[statm1]

Congrats, Scorbing. You finally matured.

I hope many Vista bashers would follow your path and grow up also.

Frankly, I'm about as patient with the Vista bashers as a little kid going "gimme gimme gimme" at a candy store.

(Hmm that's not bad of a quote I thought up ;) )

That about sums it up.. The Vista bashing pastime is getting old..

And since someone reported this as trolling and got it deleted when it really isn't, Im going to say it again:

"The sheer amount of Vista bashing topics all over the internet do not even compare to the number of Vista praising topics. So the more Vista topics that praise Vista the better. Maybe it will counteract the false info that Vista is utter crap. Which it isn't."

Edited October 11, 2008 by statm1

[MMaster23]

Well, wasn't DOS really a pirated version of Unix that Gates sold to IBM 30 years ago? :whistle:

Wait what? I hope you're joking .. I really really hope your only joking and I don't get it....

[Denis W. Veteran]

Well, wasn't DOS really a pirated version of Unix that Gates sold to IBM 30 years ago? :whistle:

What?

[markwolfe Veteran]

Well, wasn't DOS really a pirated version of Unix that Gates sold to IBM 30 years ago? :whistle:

Let me join in with the others in saying:

:huh:

[Gotenks98]

Yes, my computer was pre-installed with Vista. The "crapware" I have is AVG, Zone Alarm, and Spybot. I refuse to spend money on Norton. I can't remove those because Vista will get attacked if I do. I need some sort of security.

You are just paranoid. You should reformat and install only what you truely need. Zone Alarm is garbage as is most software firewalls. If you got any form of broadband its going to come with a hardware firewall built into the router. Secondly windows comes with a firewall. You dont need spybot if you use windows defender. Lastly Norton isnt as bad as folks make it out to be. I have always ran norton on all my systems and my systems at work and I have zero issues with it. For the most part it gets the job done and updates the virus definitions almost weekly so I dont understand the hate for norton people have. I guarantee that if you did this you would not have any of the vista issues you claimed to have.

[Ci7]

Well, wasn't DOS really a pirated version of Unix that Gates sold to IBM 30 years ago? :whistle:

fail !

The system was purchased by Microsoft and developed further as PC-DOS and MS-DOS.

[Foub]

fail !

Yeah, that's the ticket.... Nothing like a little revisionist history.

[markwolfe Veteran]

Yeah, that's the ticket.... Nothing like a little revisionist history.

:blink: DOS is not a clone of Unix of any sort. At that time, Unix was primarily on "big iron" systems, and you could not "pirate" it and make it work on a 8088 type processor.

DOS is somewhat similar to CP/M, but again, not a pirated copy of it.

Not sure what "history" you remember. I am 41, and was into computing back in the days of a Commodore PET (CP/M based), and recall no Unix pirating to create DOS for IBM.

[DaDude]

Why don't you talk to the many friendly Mac and Linux users in this forum. They'd love to hear your insight. ;)

You can get away with not having anti-virus on those because they're a lot less prone to viruses. But with Windows, you MUST have that or else your computer is going to get attacked real fast.

Yes you do need an antivirus. It doesn't have to be turned on all the time unless you visit "strange" sites. I suggest Kaspersky 2009 or NOD32. Those are the very best out there. I keep mine turned off and use it only when I am downloading something.

That, I agree on. But this guy is claiming that I can have Vista without any anti-virus software whatsoever.

You are just paranoid. You should reformat and install only what you truely need. Zone Alarm is garbage as is most software firewalls. If you got any form of broadband its going to come with a hardware firewall built into the router. Secondly windows comes with a firewall. You dont need spybot if you use windows defender. Lastly Norton isnt as bad as folks make it out to be.

Norton is great. I used to use but i just can't afford it anymore. It's just too damn expensive. And my Windows Defender stopped working because guess what: It's Vista again! I don't download much and don't visit any garbage or strange sites.

[Scorbing]

You can get away with not having anti-virus on those because they're a lot less prone to viruses. But with Windows, you MUST have that or else your computer is going to get attacked real fast.

That, I agree on. But this guy is claiming that I can have Vista without any anti-virus software whatsoever.

Norton is great. I used to use but i just can't afford it anymore. It's just too damn expensive. And my Windows Defender stopped working because guess what: It's Vista again! I don't download much and don't visit any garbage or strange sites.

Dude don't complicate your life. Reformat the HD, reinstall Vista, turn off Windows Defender (useless in my opinion) and get yourself Kaspersky or NOD32 and be happy.

[DaDude]

Dude don't complicate your life. Reformat the HD

Don't complicate my life = not complicated (self explanatory)

Reformat HD = complicated

Make up your mind. Reformatting the HD would cause more headaches. If it were that simple, I would've reformatted the HD and install XP instead. But life isn't as simple as that. I've heard horror stories from people who reformatted their HDs.

[MMaster23]

Don't complicate my life = not complicated (self explanatory)

Reformat HD = complicated

Make up your mind. Reformatting the HD would cause more headaches. If it were that simple, I would've reformatted the HD and install XP instead. But life isn't as simple as that. I've heard horror stories from people who reformatted their HDs.

Please stop eating threads.. your view has been expressed multiple times in this thread. I think we know by now :)

I'm sorry your experience with Vista has been a bad one. It's mostly my job to ensure it isn't and I hope you'll consider taking up a new fresh view on the system.

[DaDude]

OK, if Vista is so great, then why do many businesses refuse to use it. Where I work, they bought brand new computers and they all came with Vista. Then the IT department reformatted them with XP. Hmm. Why on earth would they remove such a wonderful OS???

[.tony]

OK, if Vista is so great, then why do many businesses refuse to use it. Where I work, they bought brand new computers and they all came with Vista. Then the IT department reformatted them with XP. Hmm. Why on earth would they remove such a wonderful OS???

It's much harder than you think to migrate everything to a new platform and ensure everything is working as it should in a company.

[Gotenks98]

It's much harder than you think to migrate everything to a new platform and ensure everything is working as it should in a company.

QFT. The cost and time to test applications and what not is alot. Personally in our business on the university side I am switching my users to vista as their machines die off. For the most part I have had zero issues with upgrading its just the cost involved even with the volume license setup.