Originally posted by: Tweak155
Originally posted by: dclive
Originally posted by: Tweak155
A: Main issue I have is with Trillian. Logging doesn't work well. Apparently you have to log into Administrator mode, and MAYBE it will work...didn't have to do this before.
What version of Trillian?
A: 3.1
A2: Get 3.17.
Asks permissions for everything
Turn off UAC.
A: Didn't have to do this before, furthermore that doesn't prevent all occurrences.
You didn't need to do it before because that was another OS. This one's different. Once it's off, what prompts do you get?
A: The point is I didn't have to do it before, Vista created more work for me as I was pointing out.
A2: Yes, a new OS does do that, as people learn how to use it. The point is, though, you've got a clear solution to the problem.
Video driver issues that I did not have before. Oddly enough, the ones written for XP work better than the ones written for Vista.
What issues, what drivers?
A: 162 forceware for Vista (I think). I use 158 forceware for XP. Either way, I never had a problem with the current drivers for XP
You're running beta drivers for Vista and you're complaining? C'mon, be serious. And you didn't answer - what issues?
A: I'm running the ones from NVidia's website, the ones for XP DO work (better) ON Vista. Parts of the DLL's wont load and my screen flickers occasionally
A2: I have an 8800GTS/320 and an nVidia 6200 - both using 158 (Vista release version) and they work very well. Have you tried them? Note: This isn't XP's driver; it's Vista's.
The search function is stupid. It asks to make indexes. The idea of doing this is good intention no doubt, but I don't know how frequently I search for the same types of files in the same directories.
So index the entire drive. Disk space is cheap.
A: This doesn't change that its stupid. I already did what you suggested.
So what's the issue?
A: That its stupid...you asked for a PERSONAL opinion when you asked "What issues have YOU had with Vista"..."issues" is very broad and is left for interpretation. If you wanted purely functional problems with Vista, you should have specified.
A2: I just can't imagine someone would get excited about a service that uses so little CPU and disk time that it's unnoticeable on a remotely modern machine. Why would this be a concern?
The WM device center is a cool idea...if it worked right. I spent a long time to try and get it to work...the answer? Skip it. (Moto Q)
Haven't tried it. I have a Blackberry, and it syncs via cellular service.
A: Doesn't help my problem, the problem I didn't have before. It insisted using it over the software that came with the device.
I don't suggest my having a Blackberry would help your problem, and am not sure why you thought that addressed your problem, but it's funny anyway.
Yes, if you have a Windows Mobile device, the software provided with it won't work. This has been documented, so I don't understand what your problem with it is. This is a new OS, after all, so some things work differently...do you likewise complain that you can't use drivers from a previous OS with the latest OSs? That's silly.
A: That Blackberry response was your supplied response. If you didn't want me responding to it, why did you post it, duh? Glad you provided your own comedy. And the fact that it was documented doesn't mean it is no longer a problem, it just means they know about it and haven't fixed it. But I guess that is acceptable to some people.
A2: Erm, huh? WM devices work great in Vista using the Microsoft-supplied software. What, exactly, is the issue you're having, other than that a CD from 2005 or so is no longer the correct software to use? Essentially, to me it sounds like you're complaining about a software update! "Skip it" doesn't say anything technical.
do you likewise complain that you can't use drivers from a previous OS with the latest OSs
A: No? How is that even related? The program that came with the phone WORKED, whereas what came with Vista did not. And the funny part of it is that its a WM device. I suggest reading what I wrote. I said it INSISTED on using it, but I never said I used it. In fact I said I skipped what came with Vista because it didn't work right.
A2: I have an Audiovox 5600 (2003 SE is the OS on the phone) and it works perfectly (I rarely use it, which is why I focused on the BB). What, exactly, doesn't work? "Skip it" doesn't tell me anything technical...
The repair for network connectivity is much more complicated and un-needed (for me). I could much more easily identify the issue myself and the only option in XP is "repair" which does a series of CMD lines to repair that I no longer had to type in. Thats been over-complicated by Vista thinking it can now solve the problem (which maybe it can, but hasn't yet). Result? Takes me longer to repair.
Most people don't understand what repair does, so a more thorough repair process for most people is a good thing. That said, you can always use the commandline...
A: And type in all those commands when I didn't have to before??? How does that help??
It is a new OS; it's going to work differently.
A: I don't see how that justifies making it take longer and without resolution when it finally did complete.
A2: What's the technical issue in your network connection that it's trying to fix?
So far I really don't see any actual *problems* - more just things that work differently, or you use beta drivers (Trillian's still an unknown). Are there any actual problems you're having?
A: So far I didn't see you *ask* for actual *problems*. Your question was written in a personal opinion fashion. Although I did list several.
Are there any actual problems you're having?
1 - You don't read before you respond sometimes.
2 - You didn't ask what you really wanted to know.
Facebook
Twitter