CZroe
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2001
- 24,195
- 857
- 126
NO. Actual software engineers WHO ARE PAID TO STUDY AND IMPLEMENT USER FRIENDLY UI FEATURES broke several functions and complicated things for an the entire software industry (software). That is a complete FAIL. Very few are pet peeves, so you are an idiot if you just dismiss them all because I don't like the way XP and Vista named their Document folders and crap. And very little of it is simply "solved" through customization... the non-contrasting default selection color, for example, is a problem when I work on other people's PCs. I am not going to customize their options.
It's not a pet peeve that I end up waiting on black screens, not knowing if it needs more time or is locked up. It's a UI failure. It's not a pet peeve that there is no commonly known way to return to the 2D interface in the even of a Aero problem. It's a stability failure. Whether you know it or not, you've likely encountered both problems repeatedly. For example, without Ultimate/Pro, I wouldn't have my Remote Desktop work-around and would not have a good way for confirming that it is NOT locked/too late for my open apps & unsaved data when Aero has a problem resulting in a black screen.
No, I am not resistant to change. For example, in 2001, I *WELCOMED* the XP Start Menu and ridiculed anyone who thought the 9x style was better and needlessly rolled back to it (including my friends). I also keep customizations to the bare minimum so that I can more easily walk someone through something over the phone (assuming they are configured similarly, which is more likely if we are at defaults). I always strive to fully understand the basic user's perspective and experience with any new software and embracing it is the best way to do that.
TurtleCrusher
Lifer
- Apr 20, 2008
- 10,067
- 990
- 126
All I heard was Waaaaaaaaaaaah about Windows.
Those are nothing. Literally I don't see any of those as a problem. UAC can be disabled like I said, so that's a STUPID point. Do you want it to be like XP where your PC can just get infected from pretty much anything? All Windows users wanted better security, and we got it. It works and it works great. UAC barely pops up anyway. What's your problem?
Bitch somewhere else about it.
Those are nothing. Literally I don't see any of those as a problem. UAC can be disabled like I said, so that's a STUPID point. Do you want it to be like XP where your PC can just get infected from pretty much anything? All Windows users wanted better security, and we got it. It works and it works great. UAC barely pops up anyway. What's your problem?
Bitch somewhere else about it.
CZroe
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2001
- 24,195
- 857
- 126
Disable UAC for EXACTLY the users it was meant to protect (heck, they are the ones that don't even know HOW to disable it)? THAT is a stupid point.
Basically, it has every stability issue and annoyance of the previous Windows plus many, many more and it is worsened by their own human error and you say I am wrong to be aggravated by it? Bah. THE PRIMARY ANNOYANCES USERS HAVE ARE WORSENED BY VISTA and you act like they are minor/ignorable and do not fault the OS? People claiming to have had "no problem" are not simply stretching the truth... they are LYING. Perhaps they have conditioned themselves to no longer consider forcing the power off a "problem."
And great reading comprehension there, genius. Before I replied, others GUESSED (incorrectly) that my primary problem was with UAC and so you suddenly think that *I* do and that you can criticize me for it. My only issue with it was that it was presented the same way as other, more serious, threats, conditioning the user to approve them and their actions just the same as approving their own deliberate action.
Absolutely this. I have had absolutely 0 problems relating to the issues CZroe listed. Whining about things that, somehow, manage to affect you does not indicate them as OS failures.
Honestly, complaining the Pictures should be called Images because they're not always Photos? Really? Of course I agree with you because I have a number of images that are not photos and as a computer savvy fellow I'm simply used to the convention of calling such a folder "images." However, most non-power users (which is the majority of users) simply put photos in that folder which is why it's called Pictures, to make it easier for the everyday user. Same goes for Music/Audio, etc.
Complaining that the "Start" button is now a "Windows Icon." Again, really? I think the failure is such that you have some difficulty relating to your users that there exists a button there. Really, this concept is not difficult. Hell, if they don't want to click it, how about asking them to push the Windows key on their keyboards? That completely negates their having to locate and click it.
I could go on, but I'm going to be .. and your arguments are inane.
CZroe
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2001
- 24,195
- 857
- 126
Absolutely NOT. I targeted stability and important usability issues. Not "pet peeves." As for those, the things Vista changed either worsened them or improved/added something every bit as unimportant as you pretend UI and stability are.
File copy dialogs still pop up, steal focus, and cancel when you are typing (due to hitting the space button). The primary click still sometimes gets stuck like an alt-click until you alt-click. Just like the Start Menu organizing before Vista overhauled it, these quirks have existed since Win95 and still haven't been fixed. Other than the Start Menu overhaul inadvertently fixing the interactivity problems that existed since the IE4 Desktop update for Win 95, Vista has NEW quirks without fixing, well, anything. OK, one more inadvertent "fix." My my brother and I discovered a data loss bug in Paint that has existed since Win 95 and they finally updated it (reproducible bug where "Save" would enable but your specific edits would not save), so that glitch is probably gone.
DX11 was an arbitrary exclusive at the expense of continuing to treat certain products independent of the OS (WMP, IE, and DX11)... as arbitrary as making a DX8 port, Halo 2, exclusive to it. Understandably, they have allowed XP to depreciate to push Vista, but the least they could have done was include the latest IE and WMP when SP3 went gold. Instead, you get SP2 level browser and Media Player exploits out of the box despite years of updates to those bundled, but independent products in the interim. DX is no longer independent and I've relegated myself to that, so I'm not going to bitch and moan about Win7/DX11, but there really was no excuse for the SP3 IE/WMP business.
0 problem, eh? So, you're saying that Vista has never crashed on you? You've never had to force it off? You've used it daily since early 2007? Bullshit.
As for pushing the Windows key, in case you didn't notice, I said that they have the EXACT same problem there. You don't work in a call center, do you? Yes, they are a minority of callers, but there are enough that you would encounter them more than once. You can even tell them that it is the key between "CTRL/Control and ALT/Alternate on the area to the left of the spacebar (after confirming that they are on a desktop PC) and they will insist that there is nothing there like you describe (Windows flag/logo).
And the Document folder names are a long-time Windows pet peeve... not related to Vista. All I said was that they didn't fix it. I even implied that it was too late to fix it and that they should have done it long ago with the switch to XP. My point was that they made things worse when they made similar changes that will throw a user off and yet they didn't take the opportunity to fix other things that are easy to do. IOW, an instructional document can no longer refer to "Start" button, "MY" Computer or "My" Pictures and expect the user to follow along on both OSes.
TurtleCrusher
Lifer
- Apr 20, 2008
- 10,067
- 990
- 126
I've been using Vista for over a year now. Not one crash except for using Beta drivers on my 8800GTS. That's it.
It is EASILY the most stable OS ever. Much more than XP, maybe even ubuntu.
I'm no Windows supporter, but Vista is everything XP should have been. I dread using my netbook or my T61 sometimes because xp locks up so frequently. Not to mention that networking is a bit more difficult. Sharing folders/printers is much simpler on Vista.
The built in speech recognition is bad ass too.
It is EASILY the most stable OS ever. Much more than XP, maybe even ubuntu.
I'm no Windows supporter, but Vista is everything XP should have been. I dread using my netbook or my T61 sometimes because xp locks up so frequently. Not to mention that networking is a bit more difficult. Sharing folders/printers is much simpler on Vista.
The built in speech recognition is bad ass too.
guyver01
Lifer
- Sep 25, 2000
- 22,135
- 5
- 61
i've walked users thru multiple issues on Vista, and if the user has ever seen a PC, they know where the start button is... where the my computer icon is (hell.. we even rename the my computer icon to their network PC name, and when i say "right click on the my computer icon, they know where it is).
I guess you get unlucky to talk to braindead end users. i suggest a job change.
Internal IT is much better than external support.
It also helps too if you set, by GPO, that the start menu and all windows options are in CLASSIC mode too... but even execs have the ability to change it, and some like the new mode. you just need to learn to change it (right click on the task bar... properties... start menu tab.. classic mode)
CZroe
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2001
- 24,195
- 857
- 126
Thanks, BO. It just saddens me that the blind Vista defense bandwagon has gotten bigger than the Vista-hate bandwagon, but I blame a lot of that on the Vista haters blindly hating without even knowing what's wrong with it themselves (like the Project Mojave tools). Just because there is a Vista hate bandwagon doesn't mean that there aren't legitimate reasons to criticize Vista, so people need to stop ignoring its faults or defending it unjustly. Does it make them feel smarter than the people tricked by Mojave? FWIW, if I had never used Vista n my life and they sat me down with Project Mojave, I would have laid down every single one of the same criticisms about what they fixed, didn't fix, and needed to do for UI, stability/recovery, etc.
You know what I forgot to touch on? Program Files & Program Files (x86). Ugh. Can you tell where I'm headed with this?
Oh, and when I said:
I meant to add that the average user doesn't even know the difference between a data file and an executable file (thanks MS, for dumbing down Windows by hiding extensions without making a mark to indicated executables), so a security prompt from their browser that looks identical to the one they saw when checking their installed memory isn't going to slow them down one bit (nor will one from a downloaded executable file).
I totally remember and defended it as a necessary step. You can probably find my posts defending it against all the "Win98 forever" lamers. Leave Win98 on a compatibility system for old games and software or virtualize it, but complaining about XP being slower and more bloated BY NECESSITY is stupid. It was a modern OS replacing a shoe-horned legacy OS. They built NT from the ground up and transitioned it to replace 9x, and IMO, it was time to do that again when they made Vista. Considering the compatibility issues were almost as bad, they would have made things easier for themselves in a future transition if they had just gotten it over with.
You know what I forgot to touch on? Program Files & Program Files (x86). Ugh. Can you tell where I'm headed with this?
Oh, and when I said:
I meant to add that the average user doesn't even know the difference between a data file and an executable file (thanks MS, for dumbing down Windows by hiding extensions without making a mark to indicated executables), so a security prompt from their browser that looks identical to the one they saw when checking their installed memory isn't going to slow them down one bit (nor will one from a downloaded executable file).
I totally remember and defended it as a necessary step. You can probably find my posts defending it against all the "Win98 forever" lamers. Leave Win98 on a compatibility system for old games and software or virtualize it, but complaining about XP being slower and more bloated BY NECESSITY is stupid. It was a modern OS replacing a shoe-horned legacy OS. They built NT from the ground up and transitioned it to replace 9x, and IMO, it was time to do that again when they made Vista. Considering the compatibility issues were almost as bad, they would have made things easier for themselves in a future transition if they had just gotten it over with.
Originally posted by: schneiderguy
I still don't understand all of the hate Vista gets. Windows7 is the exact same thing with a new taskbar and all of a sudden its teh best OS evar!1!!! Sure, it's better, but its not that much better
Marketing.
Raduque
Lifer
- Aug 22, 2004
- 13,140
- 138
- 106
I have no issues determining which file is selected and which isn't. Neither does my mother on her laptop.
Calling the folders "Images" and "Audio" would confuse people. They'd ask "but where do I put my pictures?" and "where do I put my music?". Calling them "Pictures" and "Music" makes the most sense, because Pictures and Music is 90% of what your average moron user puts on their computer.
The rest of your rant just sounds like nitpicky stuff (except the black screen on boot - that's crappy hardware) and stupid people problems, rather than OS problems. My dad is one of the computer stupidest people you'll meet - even he knows what a Windows key looks like and what the Windows logo on the bottom left of the taskbar is for.
I am not lying when I say I had no problems that were cause by Vista. Bad drivers yes, but not Vista. I haven't had to force a power off since I ran XP.
adlep
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2001
- 5,287
- 6
- 81
Good luck trying to remove spyware from Vista. If you touch a wrong directory, the WPA system will bitch during the startup and asking you to "activate" it. From a computer service person perspective - like me, Vista is a total piece of garbage that it difficult to work with and runs like an absolute crap on "most" of the machines...
Did I mention that it also "blocks" itself? Now how can you install an OS on your computer that "blocks" itself?
Did I mention that it also "blocks" itself? Now how can you install an OS on your computer that "blocks" itself?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter