Windows Vista is......

[American_Outcast]

Rules of this thread.

1 - This is NOT a Microsoft bashing thread, though opinions and thoughts based on experiences are encouraged.

2 - This thread is ONLY for those who have tried Vista and XP or currently use them, one or both.

With XP I wanted to try it myself and experience the good and bad of it. I also wanted to get use to XP to help others I knew who had XP. I learned a lot and helped many over come security issues, well as much as you can in XP, and the like. But....

The new computer I bought is a Compaq Presario SRSR5123WM. It has 2GB of memory, goes up to 8GB with 64 bit OS's and 4GB with 32 bit OS's. It has an AMD Athlon 64 x2 (Dual Core) 4000+ and an PCIe 16x Nvidia 8400 (bought separately.) Over all it is a very good computer for the price. The computer was on sale and it was also a display computer for a couple of months in a safe area and it wasn't used that much, mainly it was just for show and tell and was in power safe mode most of the time. I know the store I bought it from and all of their computers are like that. So I saved over 150USD. (((EDIT: I also upgraded the 250 watt PSU that same with the comptuer to a 400 watt PSU.)))

When I first got it I tried Vista for a couple of hours, (I first said 30 minutes but I was wrong, I was also half asleep and frustrated when I made my first comment on Vista.) I was also a bit annoyed at the fact that the computer was a 64bit but Vista was a 32bit OS.

I did a reinstall from the backup partition just to be on the safe side (since it was a display model,) and made sure that the problems I was having where not due just to a bad install, etc. After I installed Ubuntu64 7.10 I knew then that it was not a hardware issue either.

My short experience with Vista was bad all around. I am not sure I like the new look and feel of the start menu, which is just different and an opinion based on personal taste. The performance of Vista was just bad. It lagged badly, it was slow and sluggish. (I currently can run Ubunutu64 7.10 with many Compiz Fusion effects and at the same time run WoW (using a dual monitor set up,) and I get no lag at all. Though my fps in WoW suffers slightly while I use Compiz it does not lag, jump or get sluggish.) Security windows in Vista, for one thing or another, kept popping up. Then on top of that Compaq always bundles other software with Vista, though i noticed it was much less then what they bundled with XP on my Compaq Presario S6000CL AMD Athlon 2800+ (Yes I am a big fan of Compaq Presario's, lol.)

So I created this poll only for those who have used, tried or currently use XP and/or Vista. I would like to know exactly what experiences others have or are having with Vista and how each person feels it is compared to XP and so on.

From My short experience with Vista I can say that XP runs much smoother and with the right software, all free, one can get it as secure as it is possible to get a Windows OS. But I am thinking about giving Vista another try but for the first time ever with an MS OS I am seriously hesitant about that. Also most people I know took my advice and did not upgrade from XP to Vista. Based on my research on non-linux forums and websites, etc, I just knew it was going to be a disaster.

So what are others thoughts, opinions and experiences with Vista?

[bashveank]

'Tis a disaster. It's slower, uses more resources, bugs you about every little thing while being no more secure, and Microsoft has removed easy access to any tool to help you know what your computer is actually doing.

[qbox]

I used XP for a long time. I'm want to experiment a lot with OS system and security and XP is better then Vista. Vista is very very graphick oriented and her job is to use CPU resurses more ram more HDD to run more lumber procceses etc. WinXP was the same but not like vista. Windows spend all resources on your machine. If you by new computer and put new microsoft operation system, it will work same like your old machine (i think on speed). Now I use Ubuntu linux. My computer run much much more faster. With 4 desctops I have enough work space. I can see the program code on applications and to see how they work. I can modify in the way I need them. There is a lot of BUGS but there is a challenge to solve the problems :) I must have winXP on virtual machine because I dont have visual studio for linux. I need that program because I use it in school. But I will newer use windows anymore.

(sorry for my language)

[screaminj3sus]

I run both XP, Vista, and Ubuntu on my PC (In sig) Vista runs fine on it, XP is obviously a little faster, but vista runs fine on it, Vista is aesthetically pleasing, Does more out of the box (Out of the box drivers much better, With XP I have to download sound, and even an ethernet driver so I cang et itnernet, vista pretty much everything works out of the box like ubuntu) Vista actually has been a bit more stable. There are problems (Slow copying, unzipping although I use winrar anyway) Overall it's stable and fast, and has some very usefull features (Search, Security rediesigned start menu, better backup, superfetch ect..) It is not as good as I hoped but hopefully sp1 will bring some improvement. Overall I think it is a good upgrade. Gaming performance is equal to that of XP (F.E.A.R, HL2, CS:S, DOOM 3) I like alot fo the redisigned UI, like explorer's new layout and the control panel search is really usefull. Anyone that says it's MEII has probably never used ME or Vista.

Other things I like is the installer is MUCH better and faster than XP's convoluted install process. And everything worked out of the box (Nvidia drivers, Aero sound ect..)

[Steve1961]

I run Vista and XP as well as Ubuntu, but I tend to use the widows only for testing new anti-spyware and other utilities, as I fix windows computers for a living. That said, I like playing with all operating systems and Vista is no exception. My impressions so far are that it's much more of a resource hog than XP, driver support is still patchy in areas, and in terms of stability it's still buggy - this seems to be especially so on new low spec PCs preinstalled with vista and loads of irrelevant trialware that struggle to run it smoothly. However, give it time and I'm sure many of the teething problems will sort themselves out, especially as entry level hardware gets more powerful. On the plus side, Vista is also incredibly easy to use in a dual boot setup, thanks mainly to EasyBCD.

[Can+~]

So far my father's laptop with vista has:
-Had graphical hiccups, and somehow destroy all of the graphic layout. Killing "explorer.exe" is the only way to bring it back alive.
-Took 15 minutes to boot the first time, after tweaking, takes 5 minutes.
-Almost all software that says "Vista compatible" is not, my father needed an autodesk app for work, and it was "vista capable" (lie)
-Convinced my father that "it's more secure", but anytime a "Cancel or Allow" window pops up, he doesn't read, he just clicks "allow" everytime to skip it. So I deactivated the UAC crap for him.
-Finally, he disabled all the "security" making it less a resource hog.

I would install ubuntu on it's laptop, but it's an HP, and I've been reading bad reviews about that mix.

My vote: A disaster. I also agree that Xp is better than Vista. And I think no patch will save this Vista thing, since the main reasons why it sucks:
-DRM dropped the soap, microsoft picked it up. So Vista wastes resources ensuring "you're not doing illegal things".
-Micro$oft is so concerned on security. But not user's security, it's own security. They are capable of treating customers as pirates. (Remember the WGA-down day?)
-It's so bloated...

[energiya]

If computers are faster it doesn't mean you have to build an OS that uses as many resources as possible...

[reloadSE]

Well I've been using vista snice julyish and had to reinstall it 3 times now.. hate the new bootloader (makes it easier with easybcd and vistabootpro though) and the aero interface makes the computer lag up too much. I reckon if i decide to upgrade that computers specs it will run faster but i shouldn't have to! I run ubuntu on it as well ...

[jrusso2]

Bought a computer with Vista on it. The network card would stop working for no apparent reason. Then for no apparent reason it would start again.

Tried to install an Intel 5800 I had laying around. This is a card that works with everything from Dos, to Novell netware , Unix, Linux to Any Windows except I could not get it to work with Vista.

Took the PC back and got my money back.

[RebounD11]

First time I tried Vista (Ultimate) it made my not so bad computer (not even by today's standards even if it is almost 3 and a half years old) look like a coffee grinder... my network didn't work, my graphics wasn't fully functional and I've had numerous problems with sound, mouse and tv-tuner. So that first experience ended very fast and with a good feeling that everything worked as I was expecting (since I'm an exclusive Linux user for more than 2 years now I wanted to see Vista fail).

After a while I gave it another try, with a much more open mind (and to justify my investment), and determined to get it Vista to work at its full potential. So I installed again. I got the same problems as the first time, this time only I updated immediately after installation, and after the reboot surprise: network and Internet connection working, sound crystal clear, it even detected my mouse correctly and asked me if I wanted the manufacturer's driver or the MS driver, and my video was working fine even without me installing any additional drivers or software.

After working out the drivers for my hardware (an hour of searching and installing and rebooting) I went on to install the software I use/need for work and fun. there I had an even bigger surprise: everything worked, anti-virus (Avast), instant messaging (Y!mess), audio and video players (VLC, Winamp) even the games I play (Counetr-Strike, Warcraft 3) and many more (uTorrent, Adobe Reader, Nero, Firefox) - with one exception PADS 2005 - for electronic design, but that's not of general interest.

Not only everything works, but it works faster, and although it could get annoying I feel safer with the new security center. And everything looks better, more up-to-date.

I haven't had time to use it very much but after a little work I'm very impressed with Vista and I think I'll keep it on my dad's computer for a while, and so will he.

PS: Even if I voted excellent, but needs little fixing, I still think that Windows will never rise to Linux's level. Very soon the OS will be just another GUI and it won't matter which one you have because all will do the same things equally as good, and people will choose the one with better security, better support and better price, and of course the one they could customize and personalize to fit more to their style and in my opinion that can only be Linux or Linux-based - unless a great change of politics and opinion at MS and MAC, or if someone comes out of nowhere with such a great idea that it will change the situation dramatically.

[zyg0t3]

I tend to argree with screamin,

If your system is fast enough Vista works well. If not then not. I haven't run into any hardware detection problems, on both my desktop and laptop. If you know how to tinker with your system you can get/find the utilities that you need/want.

I run both XP, Vista, and Ubuntu on my PC (In sig) Vista runs fine on it, XP is obviously a little faster, but vista runs fine on it, Vista is aesthetically pleasing, Does more out of the box (Out of the box drivers much better, With XP I have to download sound, and even an ethernet driver so I cang et itnernet, vista pretty much everything works out of the box like ubuntu) Vista actually has been a bit more stable. There are problems (Slow copying, unzipping although I use winrar anyway) Overall it's stable and fast, and has some very usefull features (Search, Security rediesigned start menu, better backup, superfetch ect..) It is not as good as I hoped but hopefully sp1 will bring some improvement. Overall I think it is a good upgrade. Gaming performance is equal to that of XP (F.E.A.R, HL2, CS:S, DOOM 3) I like alot fo the redisigned UI, like explorer's new layout and the control panel search is really usefull. Anyone that says it's MEII has probably never used ME or Vista.

Other things I like is the installer is MUCH better and faster than XP's convoluted install process. And everything worked out of the box (Nvidia drivers, Aero sound ect..)

[American_Outcast]

Well I have more to add to my first post about my experiences with Vista. I spent a better part of the day installing and trying to get things to work.

The install went slower then Ubuntu64 7.10 (or Fiesty32 for that matter.) Finally all things installed. So I made a few changes. I wanted more control over what programs I used for security. So I installed AVG free, Zone Alarm, Ccleaner, Spy-Bot and Firefox. So far so good. All things worked fine. Then came the Vista update and............. (See attached picture.)

I tried safe mode, safe mode with network support, and several other things. I kept getting the same screen. There was no way to get into the system to even try and fix it. So after all those hours with this Vista experience and the previous one I had and mentioned in my original post I can honestly say it has been a disaster. (All of this happened after I updated Vista, I guess that is really no surprise. Also, as I mentioned in my first post, I just got this computer and it came with Vista. The hardware should have been good enough to work with any OS.)


Now in all fairness I did have one problem with Ubuntu after Vista. I had unhooked sda where Ubuntu is installed before I installed Vista. Vista re-formated and installed on sdb, which it saw as sda. Now when I was done with Vista I hooked the Ubuntu drive, sda, back up. I checked my bios to make sure it would boot off of that. And then I tried to boot it. To make a long story short it had an issue with sdb because of the changes. I really hate the uuid in fstab. I need to research that so I can understand why Ubuntu has it that way. I booted the livecd, fixed the fstab and took out the uuid's on all the partitions and it works fine. See, with Ubuntu or other Linux OS's and BSD at least there is a way to fix, usually an easy way, a problem if the system doesn't want to boot. With Vista this wasn't possible for me.

So Vista was a disaster and I am staying with Ubuntu, (I wasn't really considering leaving Ubuntu, lol, but now I know, for myself, Ubuntu is the future and Vista is just not going to do it for me.) However I do want to give Sabayon a try since I have a lot of free space where Vista was.

[TR82]

Mid February I decided to buy a new desktop computer to replace a 4 y/o HP pc which was on its last legs. A friend dissuaded me from buying off the shelf, that he'd build me one instead if I bought all the bits. And he did a great job. The spec way exceeds the Vista minimum. But I stupidly opted for Vista which at that point had only been out for a couple of weeks.

Performance-wise it was as slow as the HP it was replacing. It didn't recognise my 2 y/o Kodak digital camera & Kodak advised that they wouldn't support "obsolete models" on Vista ... 2 years old and they reckon that's obsolete. And slowly things just started failing on Vista, Vista compliant games wouldn't boot up, started getting BSOD, accumulated 4Gb of error reports, update manager stopped working - which was unfortunate because the most vital update I was waiting for was for update manager itself ... therefore no new updates could be downloaded.

Decided to reinstall. Couldn't even do that through Vista and after the umpteenth attempt it advised that my version of Vista was a pirated copy. Phoned the microsoft helpline and was told they couldn't help in any way shape or form because silly me had bought the OEM version.

At that point I gave up ... and a Feisty CD arrived in the post. Gave it a go. Very impressed. And haven't looked back since. I gave the Vista CD to a friend as a swop for a £2 ethernet cable LOL.

I do regret buying Vista & I've only myself to blame. I thought I'd be all state of the art with it but sadly not. It's just so annoying. With the £110 I spent on Vista I couldve bought something useful for the house instead. What a waste of money. Never again.

[vishzilla]

haven't tried vista yet!!!!!!!! :)

[eljoeb]

I dual boot Vista and Fedora with no problems at all. Vista is okay; it serves a purpose. I haven't experienced the bugs everyone here has been talking about. Hardware detection was pretty good; it had an Nvidia driver ready for me on arrival, which is nice because that always pisses me off about linux. It definitely uses a lot of resources, but aside from that, its okay. XP had teething problems, Vista does too.

I think they tried to implement some linux/mac -ish ideas to streamline the OS. It works to a degree; you can tell its sorta pasted on. Vista would be a good choice for someone who doesn't like canoodling with their computer. It is a little too resource intensive to recommend for gaming, but if you have a really high end computer, you probably won't see a difference. My computer was by no means cutting edge 5 years ago, but it runs Vista just fine.

Quite honestly, its okay, just not great. A buggy as hell Linux distro would get a lot of slack around here but MS doesn't have that sort of luck. I guess I'm too old to give a *%^# about the latest MS outrage, but I just want my computer to do what I need it to do, and I'll be happy. Fedora and Vista both do that, so guess what? :)

[American_Outcast]

I decided out of fairness I will give Vista one more chance. I will research to see if others had the same issues I had and if so what the solution was. But this will be my last try. If this fails then I will just install XP on a partition, for those games I just have to play lol, and leave it at that.

I really did want to give Vista a fair chance. It apparently just doesn't want to work with me. It must be jealous of me using Ubuntu as my main OS., :lolflag:

[aks44]

In cumulated time, I guess I have spent like a full week trying to get the network working correctly, to no avail.

At first, it wouldn't even connect to the LAN. I went away, came back a few hours later, and automagically it saw the LAN. Tried to browse it, it broke again.


Anyway, NetBIOS still doesn't work, even after tinkering with it for an incredible amount of time, so I can only access other comps on the LAN through their IP.


"Windows Vista, the only OS that works only when you don't use it..."
=> A total disaster.

[American_Outcast]

"Windows Vista, the only OS that works only when you don't use it..."


:lolflag::lolflag::lolflag:

Nicely put.

[igknighted]

With XP I wanted to try it myself and experience the good and bad of it. I also wanted to get use to XP to help others I knew who had XP. I learned a lot and helped many over come security issues, well as much as you can in XP, and the like. But....

The new computer I bought is a Compaq Presario SRSR5123WM. It has 2GB of memory, goes up to 8GB with 64 bit OS's and 4GB with 32 bit OS's. It has an AMD Athlon 64 x2 (Dual Core) 4000+ and an PCIe 16x Nvidia 8400 (bought separately.) Over all it is a very good computer for the price. The computer was on sale and it was also a display computer for a couple of months in a safe area and it wasn't used that much, mainly it was just for show and tell and was in power safe mode most of the time. I know the store I bought it from and all of their computers are like that. So I saved over 150USD. (((EDIT: I also upgraded the 250 watt PSU that same with the comptuer to a 400 watt PSU.)))

When I first got it I tried Vista for a couple of hours, (I first said 30 minutes but I was wrong, I was also half asleep and frustrated when I made my first comment on Vista.) I was also a bit annoyed at the fact that the computer was a 64bit but Vista was a 32bit OS.

I did a reinstall from the backup partition just to be on the safe side (since it was a display model,) and made sure that the problems I was having where not due just to a bad install, etc. After I installed Ubuntu64 7.10 I knew then that it was not a hardware issue either.

My short experience with Vista was bad all around. I am not sure I like the new look and feel of the start menu, which is just different and an opinion based on personal taste. The performance of Vista was just bad. It lagged badly, it was slow and sluggish. (I currently can run Ubunutu64 7.10 with many Compiz Fusion effects and at the same time run WoW (using a dual monitor set up,) and I get no lag at all. Though my fps in WoW suffers slightly while I use Compiz it does not lag, jump or get sluggish.) Security windows in Vista, for one thing or another, kept popping up. Then on top of that Compaq always bundles other software with Vista, though i noticed it was much less then what they bundled with XP on my Compaq Presario S6000CL AMD Athlon 2800+ (Yes I am a big fan of Compaq Presario's, lol.)

So I created this poll only for those who have used, tried or currently use XP and/or Vista. I would like to know exactly what experiences others have or are having with Vista and how each person feels it is compared to XP and so on.

From My short experience with Vista I can say that XP runs much smoother and with the right software, all free, one can get it as secure as it is possible to get a Windows OS. But I am thinking about giving Vista another try but for the first time ever with an MS OS I am seriously hesitant about that. Also most people I know took my advice and did not upgrade from XP to Vista. Based on my research on non-linux forums and websites, etc, I just knew it was going to be a disaster.

So what are others thoughts, opinions and experiences with Vista?

You purchased a graphics card that didn't exist when the OS came out, and don't mention getting the latest forceware from Nvidia. This will make a WORLD of difference.

Also, you installed from the backup partition. Big mistake. Your OEM probably had crappy beta drivers and tons of bloatware/trialware, like any XP backup partition would (but worse due to the quickly improving nature of vista drivers). You should do a clean install from a stock Vista disk and install the latest drivers from the hardware manufacturer for best results.

I have a computer with very similar specs (less ram, better vid card, similar proc, etc.). I can play CS:S on all high @ 1280x1024 over 100fps. I can play the new crysis dx10 demo (looks like a great game) with medium settings @ 1024x768 with playable frame rates. I get no noticable lag in window/application responsiveness (with the exception of the trillian astra beta I run... but its beta, so I blame trillian here).

Basically, I run Vista on four computers (My desktop, my laptop and I service my parents vista machine and my brothers vista machine) and have had no serious issues. I had a windows update fail, but it was an easy fix. I had ATI drivers for my parents radeonHD 2600pro fail to install properly at first, but it also was a simple fix.

In all my time working with Vista, I have been impressed by its improved security and good looks (for microsoft, at least). It is by no means perfect, and there have been some glitches here and there. But by and large, my experience has been very positive. I will call it a giant step in the right direction.

Oh, and dx10 gaming looks great, if the crysis demo is any indication.

NOTE: This does not include my views on restrictive licensing. I HATE the vista license. But thanks to the MSDNAA I get it for free, so I can deal with it. I would not be running Vista otherwise due to cost and licensing.

[igknighted]

I dual boot Vista and Fedora with no problems at all. Vista is okay; it serves a purpose. I haven't experienced the bugs everyone here has been talking about. Hardware detection was pretty good; it had an Nvidia driver ready for me on arrival, which is nice because that always pisses me off about linux.

You want to get the latest forceware from nvidia... while vista works on the stock drivers, its like going from the open-source ati drivers to fglrx... 3d performance is much much better with the latest drivers from nvidia.

[3rdalbum]

A friend has Vista on her new computer. It takes a few minutes to get to just the desktop. Startup programs take a few minutes more. There are serious program incompatibilities. I'm not sure whether Microsoft can get Vista to work better.

[misfitpierce]

Disaster straight up and down... Hate windows but I tried it and inside first game (warrock - free fps) got a blue screen of death... To each their own though... (down with windows) :)

[peatrap]

XP worked great for me ( but,) I do a lot of hardware and software changes, this
constant changing became a rub between some guy in India and me, so I up dated my system downloaded ubuntu 6.06 burned a copy disconnected from the internet
removed the hard drive installed a new one. Ubuntu was installed and I never looked back. Microsoft can hear the bongo's and there getting louder, micro soft is micro softs worst enemy.:lol:

[goumples]

Im still pissed about the false promise of WinFS.

[-grubby]

Im still pissed about the false promise of WinFS.

yah! It took them 6 years to make something with lost promises

[inversekinetix]

i wont touch vista with a stick until it gets fixed. i was using win2k until last year when i switched to XP. My XP is tweaked to death and runs/boots faster than my fresh install of gutsy. If i had used xp when it first came out i would probably have run into problems, saying that if i had used microwave ovens when they first came out i would probably have gotten cancer. ms will fix it in due course. its sad that there is so much bashing done, people act like vista is the only thing with problems.

http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=140

[wieman01]

... a gas guzzler. My friend's (brand new) laptop computer runs out of juice in less than 30 minutes. The whole system is a joke.

[igknighted]

Oh, I've also been playing the UT3 beta demo... that is shaping up excellent. I have not found a linux beta demo, but I would like to see the difference between UT3 on linux and UT3 on dx10. While it doesn't appear to be quite up to the level of games like Crysis, I'm still skeptical on how the non-dx10 version will run in comparisson.

Vista == great for gaming at the moment, much better than XP

[FredB]

Windows Vista is for me a new Windows Millenium Edition !

Nothing more to say.

[American_Outcast]

You purchased a graphics card that didn't exist when the OS came out, and don't mention getting the latest forceware from Nvidia. This will make a WORLD of difference.

Also, you installed from the backup partition. Big mistake. Your OEM probably had crappy beta drivers and tons of bloatware/trialware, like any XP backup partition would (but worse due to the quickly improving nature of vista drivers). You should do a clean install from a stock Vista disk and install the latest drivers from the hardware manufacturer for best results.

I have a computer with very similar specs (less ram, better vid card, similar proc, etc.). I can play CS:S on all high @ 1280x1024 over 100fps. I can play the new crysis dx10 demo (looks like a great game) with medium settings @ 1024x768 with playable frame rates. I get no noticable lag in window/application responsiveness (with the exception of the trillian astra beta I run... but its beta, so I blame trillian here).

Basically, I run Vista on four computers (My desktop, my laptop and I service my parents vista machine and my brothers vista machine) and have had no serious issues. I had a windows update fail, but it was an easy fix. I had ATI drivers for my parents radeonHD 2600pro fail to install properly at first, but it also was a simple fix.

In all my time working with Vista, I have been impressed by its improved security and good looks (for microsoft, at least). It is by no means perfect, and there have been some glitches here and there. But by and large, my experience has been very positive. I will call it a giant step in the right direction.

Oh, and dx10 gaming looks great, if the crysis demo is any indication.

NOTE: This does not include my views on restrictive licensing. I HATE the vista license. But thanks to the MSDNAA I get it for free, so I can deal with it. I would not be running Vista otherwise due to cost and licensing.


Well I tried for the third time. The first time I did reinstall from the back up partition. The last two times it was from the disk.

And I don't even want to get into it . It still didn't work correctly. I never had this many problems with any Windows OS including ME. So I give up.

The motherboard came with an Nvidia 6100 integrated. Installing the latest drivers form Nvidia is the first thing I do without even giving it any thought. I have no idea why this doesn't want to work. I am so frustrated right now I don't really care. I got rid of Vista and now have Ubuntu and Sabayon. I will install XP on a virtual machine and on my older Compaq I will have it for XP and games.

Vista will get put away until service pack 2 or 3.

[igknighted]

Well I tried for the third time. The first time I did reinstall from the back up partition. The last two times it was from the disk.

And I don't even want to get into it . It still didn't work correctly. I never had this many problems with any Windows OS including ME. So I give up.

The motherboard came with an Nvidia 6100 integrated. Installing the latest drivers form Nvidia is the first thing I do without even giving it any thought. I have no idea why this doesn't want to work. I am so frustrated right now I don't really care. I got rid of Vista and now have Ubuntu and Sabayon. I will install XP on a virtual machine and on my older Compaq I will have it for XP and games.

Vista will get put away until service pack 2 or 3.

I'm sorry it didn't work out. I am still really shocked so many are having these kinds of problems... Vista has been a far sight better than XP for me, and while 4 pcs isn't a large sample size per se, I would have expected some issues if the defect is with the OS. Which leads me to believe that drivers for Vista are very lacking and hardware vendors were not ready to support it fully. Sound familiar? I think driver support will improve (on new hardware... no one seems to want to support "legacy" devices, which is a shame), and performance with it. But it's a shame these third party issues have stolen the spotlight from some tremendous improvements MS made in Vista.

[Morokiane]

I built a dual quad core machine with 8 gigs of ram, lots of HD space, NVidia 8800GTX and went ahead with Vista Ultimate 64 bit. I certainly have a computer that has the balls to run Vista. Overall my biggest issues have been getting software to work. 3dsMax and Maya have issues with their viewports and screw up massively unless I set the GUI theme to Classic windows. Combustion likes to crash. The Vista security of "Are you sure you want to install the software you told me you wanted to install?" is fscking annoying...and a must turn off right away. I like the look of the GUI...but that doesn't warrant the massive use of resources. Though its alright and Windows always have issues when they get released I think Microsoft could have done a much better job. They need to stop reinventing the wheel. XP is a good OS they should have built onto it instead of scrapping it.

[igknighted]

I built a dual quad core machine with 8 gigs of ram, lots of HD space, NVidia 8800GTX and went ahead with Vista Ultimate 64 bit. I certainly have a computer that has the balls to run Vista. Overall my biggest issues have been getting software to work. 3dsMax and Maya have issues with their viewports and screw up massively unless I set the GUI theme to Classic windows. Combustion likes to crash. The Vista security of "Are you sure you want to install the software you told me you wanted to install?" is fscking annoying...and a must turn off right away. I like the look of the GUI...but that doesn't warrant the massive use of resources. Though its alright and Windows always have issues when they get released I think Microsoft could have done a much better job. They need to stop reinventing the wheel. XP is a good OS they should have built onto it instead of scrapping it.

How is cancel/allow any different than root access in linux? I love it, because I know crap isn't running that I don't want to... which was a huge problem in XP.

The fact is, XP was not a good OS anymore. It was passable for a time, but it simply is not able to cope with the inter-connected nature of todays computer world and was falling apart under the weight of legacy support. The whole system was designed to work in 16bits, with 32bits tacked on. Ever try win XP 64 bit? Yikes... Basically, XP was a renamed, reskinned windows 2000. Which itself was only a moderate change from windows NT. Windows NT has been around how long? In many ways, I don't think they did enough of a re-write. But it is a good start. Look at what apple did. Totally changed mac OS at version 10. Windows needs something similar, and I think Vista is a decent first step... if they continue and see it through to the end. If they decide "good enough", then it was a waste of effort.

[Morokiane]

How is cancel/allow any different than root access in linux? I love it, because I know crap isn't running that I don't want to... which was a huge problem in XP.

The fact is, XP was not a good OS anymore. It was passable for a time, but it simply is not able to cope with the inter-connected nature of todays computer world and was falling apart under the weight of legacy support. The whole system was designed to work in 16bits, with 32bits tacked on. Ever try win XP 64 bit? Yikes... Basically, XP was a renamed, reskinned windows 2000. Which itself was only a moderate change from windows NT. Windows NT has been around how long? In many ways, I don't think they did enough of a re-write. But it is a good start. Look at what apple did. Totally changed mac OS at version 10. Windows needs something similar, and I think Vista is a decent first step... if they continue and see it through to the end. If they decide "good enough", then it was a waste of effort.
95/98 were the stepping stones of legacy support and supporting 16 bit apps. XP has no 16 bit code on the front end...that is why it mem dumps for less than 95/98. XP is Microsofts version of OS X. Apple released OS X in 2001...and have kept it going with point releases...instead of dong the Microsoft model and scrapping it every 2 years and rebuilding brand new. Microsoft should do a better job building for the future instead of now.

It still comes down to why does Microsoft has to make newer Windows use more resources? Gnome with Compiz-Fusion I have a fancier cooler desktop than what Aqua gives me for far less system resources. My friend was checking out CF and was amazed that it loaded in 15 seconds as opposed to the 1 to 1.5 minutes Aqua takes to load. I see no excuse for such poor code optimization.

[igknighted]

95/98 were the stepping stones of legacy support and supporting 16 bit apps. XP has no 16 bit code on the front end...that is why it mem dumps for less than 95/98. XP is Microsofts version of OS X. Apple released OS X in 2001...and have kept it going with point releases...instead of dong the Microsoft model and scrapping it every 2 years and rebuilding brand new. Microsoft should do a better job building for the future instead of now.

It still comes down to why does Microsoft has to make newer Windows use more resources? Gnome with Compiz-Fusion I have a fancier cooler desktop than what Aqua gives me for far less system resources. My friend was checking out CF and was amazed that it loaded in 15 seconds as opposed to the 1 to 1.5 minutes Aqua takes to load. I see no excuse for such poor code optimization.

I agree that point releases are ideal, but you need a scalable, long term kernel and guts to build on. Apple found that with their variation on the Mach kernel and other BSD stuff they use. Windows found that with... NT? I don't buy it. I don't believe that NT provides a stable, scalable platform capable of being the framework for "point releases".

I also don't think Vista does, but it is closer. We shall see what Microsoft is cooking up. I think you and I agree on what the ideal for a company like microsoft is, we just disagree on how XP and Vista fit in there. I think Vista is closer to that ideal than XP, but still a far cry from it. We'll have to agree to disagree on that part.

EDIT: Yeah, the bloat in the code is pretty bad. I don't think Aero is the sole cause, I think there are lots of areas that need to be tidied up... this is the price you pay for proprietary software though.

[desertboy]

I jus found it amusing that Vista would not see my network card (On a vista certified motherboard, one of the "selling" points) and I had to buy a new one (even after downloading the latest drivers) and then when I installed Ubuntu it just worked. Also Vista randomly crashed but Ubuntu only crashed while Gutsy was still alpha (None since). I've never booted Vista since I installed Gutsy (early July) and the other day I deleted the Vista partition to give me more space.


I quite liked XP though but I don't miss the spyware.