-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
I can't believe it, I'm a Vista basher too
Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
soonerproud
Golden Member
You obviously did enough to reply, LOL. 😀
flexy
Diamond Member
>>>
i've been using vista for a year, and it's not nearly as enlightened or evolved as you make it sound. from my perspective, it is a poorly rehashed and fattened xp, that never left beta.
>>>
oh absolutely !!! Thats the impression i have. I think no day goes by where i dont seriously think about trashing Vista and re-isntall XP64.
Its fattened, and IMHO all the "enhancements" really dont translate into real life performance AT ALL, this even with readyboost, superfetch and all those "features" which are supposed to make Vista faster.
I have never sit that long on a PC before doing nothing than waiting, either for shut-down, or start-up....or waiting for WinMail to start up...or doing countless things which took a fraction for a second on XP...and now seem to be bloated and take LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNGGGGGGGGGG(horn)....excuse my joke.
Some people are praising Vista and say XP is "primitive"...but i see the enhancements in Vista only as very annyoing, rather slowing doing everything...or just doing unwanted things.
it just doesnt want into my head that my old XP rig feels so much snappier in EVERY way than this high-end PC here with 4 cores and 4 times as much memory.
Right now i am sitting at the problem (believe me, i looked on the web for soem time already) that mobsync.exe and with it wmplayer is starting in the BG...with no way to see what triggers them respective i tried everything to kill those processess or dont let them start at all, no success until now.
I am no idiot, i can say i am very savvy when it comes to PCs/OS..i am very, very close to get me another HD with XP on it since i am so sick of this slow and sluggish OS - i though that building a new high-end rig is supposed to be fun...but i got more headaches since i run Vista than actually enjoying the new machine, now talking about everyday working with the OS. (Gaming performance is ok, i have to admit!)
I am not even sure about readyboost and superfetch - people say those services/tasks run at low priority...but i have reason to believe it is one reason for startup and shutdown delays since the 4GB cache is always created...and creating a 4GB cache file on a USB stick is SLOW.
So..the little performance gain you get using readyboost is lost again because of delays shutting down/restarting the PC and waiting for the 4gb cache re-created on the USB.
In all my own Vista-bashing threads i rarely mentioned another big factor, this is 3rd party app and drivers incompatibility..the fact that many programs just wont work anymore (or not right)...this even more so under Vista X64.
i've been using vista for a year, and it's not nearly as enlightened or evolved as you make it sound. from my perspective, it is a poorly rehashed and fattened xp, that never left beta.
>>>
oh absolutely !!! Thats the impression i have. I think no day goes by where i dont seriously think about trashing Vista and re-isntall XP64.
Its fattened, and IMHO all the "enhancements" really dont translate into real life performance AT ALL, this even with readyboost, superfetch and all those "features" which are supposed to make Vista faster.
I have never sit that long on a PC before doing nothing than waiting, either for shut-down, or start-up....or waiting for WinMail to start up...or doing countless things which took a fraction for a second on XP...and now seem to be bloated and take LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNGGGGGGGGGG(horn)....excuse my joke.
Some people are praising Vista and say XP is "primitive"...but i see the enhancements in Vista only as very annyoing, rather slowing doing everything...or just doing unwanted things.
it just doesnt want into my head that my old XP rig feels so much snappier in EVERY way than this high-end PC here with 4 cores and 4 times as much memory.
Right now i am sitting at the problem (believe me, i looked on the web for soem time already) that mobsync.exe and with it wmplayer is starting in the BG...with no way to see what triggers them respective i tried everything to kill those processess or dont let them start at all, no success until now.
I am no idiot, i can say i am very savvy when it comes to PCs/OS..i am very, very close to get me another HD with XP on it since i am so sick of this slow and sluggish OS - i though that building a new high-end rig is supposed to be fun...but i got more headaches since i run Vista than actually enjoying the new machine, now talking about everyday working with the OS. (Gaming performance is ok, i have to admit!)
I am not even sure about readyboost and superfetch - people say those services/tasks run at low priority...but i have reason to believe it is one reason for startup and shutdown delays since the 4GB cache is always created...and creating a 4GB cache file on a USB stick is SLOW.
So..the little performance gain you get using readyboost is lost again because of delays shutting down/restarting the PC and waiting for the 4gb cache re-created on the USB.
In all my own Vista-bashing threads i rarely mentioned another big factor, this is 3rd party app and drivers incompatibility..the fact that many programs just wont work anymore (or not right)...this even more so under Vista X64.
wwswimming
Banned
primitive ? using a pine cone for toilet paper, that's primitive.
The Boston Dangler
Lifer
so, vista is crap, and you're answer is "don't touch it, it's perfect." you still haven't explained how doing nothing will fix the problems i described.
someone with 30,000 posts should have known there would be plenty vista-bashing with a thread title like "I can't believe it, I'm a Vista basher too". and the only FUD i found came from you.
agreed :roll:
Maximilian
Lifer
Im not obsessed, im just saying you wasted money IMO, dont like my opinion? Tough.
If that is the case then how the heck can you state :
I know the answer to that, your a backpeddeling hypocrite. As for that second bolded point, they spend money because the guy in the store told them to, or because the compufixit guy that came to look at their knackered comp advised they buy norton from him, thats why money is spent on it. Also from what you have stated about average users it seems you are completely out of touch with even recent opinions on vista, people still dont like it overall, therefore that would make anyone more of an expert than you.
You miss the point again, this happens on vista, not on XP, TDR errors also happen on vista, to my knowledge never on XP. For the end user its irrelivent whos fault the problems are, maybe the guys at creative lost half their staff or something, who knows, who cares if it dosent work and crashes on vista and it didnt on XP then people will want to go back to XP rather than sit and play the blame game.
Most on AT dont, all of the people i know do, and they all hate vista, some cite the old reason that games run slower which i know has been largely solved now, other cite more valid reasons such as xyz dosent work or, this crashes, or i cant do something i could do in XP.
Yet you think XP is an ancient, outdated insecure OS, but your happy to recommend people stay with it? Well that makes no sense at all, i recommend XP to some because it will leave them trouble free, vista to others for hopefully the same reasons. XP is still a very good OS.
They dont get any damn changes, thats why theres so many people complaining "its just like XP but prettier" plus you said earlier average users care about the new driver model and sound stack? Now your saying they dont care? Well which is it, make up your mind...
User rot? Sorry, googled that term and nothing came up, it said did you mean "XP user root". Well the people here are technically competant, and if they get this new phenomenon ive never heard of before today and never encountered then everyone else less competant must be prone to it then hmm? I have never ever had XP just get slower, worse, crash more over time. That was windows 98 and ME, XP dosent rot over time. If you treat it badly and install any number of garbage programs ridden with spyware and viruses then yeah itll get slower, so will vista, but the OS does not rot on its own over time.
This isnt a good conversation this is just you refusing to accept vista is not wonderful, its not great, and it does have its problems. Not to mention that average joe dosent give a rats ass about a sound stack or driver model and also cant see any benefits they give.
Well I just updated a brand new system and built it 100% from the ground up for vista and DX10 use.
Ive had no issues at all..
8400 on a DS3L with 8 gigs of Patriot DDR2 8500
On Home Premium 64x runs like a freaking top super fast booting with 8 gigs and never ever gives even 1 stutter in games or Adobe CS2 or Quark.. or anything else..
I can literally game and work at the same time and never max this system out it seems like..
try that on XP.. oh wait you cant cause XP 64 is a POS.
Ive had no issues at all..
8400 on a DS3L with 8 gigs of Patriot DDR2 8500
On Home Premium 64x runs like a freaking top super fast booting with 8 gigs and never ever gives even 1 stutter in games or Adobe CS2 or Quark.. or anything else..
I can literally game and work at the same time and never max this system out it seems like..
try that on XP.. oh wait you cant cause XP 64 is a POS.
Mem
Lifer
FYI I'm using Audigy 4 sound card,in my gaming experience which is over a year with Vista are the drivers work fine,never had any sound issues,I even use the Universal Creative free Alchemy wrapper for my older games with no problems and this is with Vista x64.Creative seem to have more issues with X-FI and Vista combo then Audigy.
Pointless argument ,most benchies on the net prove Vista is up there with XP,as to stability again I have stated I have played over 70 games from oldies to new games with no issues that are caused by Vista.
You can recommend what you want,personally I recommend to my friends and family Vista and none have had any REAL issues so far ,also I would not recommend an old OS like XP unless I could think of a really good reason,if you want an old OS that is coming towards the end of its cycle,poorer security,limited DX support then fine,personally noway I would go back to XP (I have been using XP for 7 years plus).
In my experience Vista is a lot harder to crash then XP,and I get far less spyware on Vista (none actually),with XP I had the old harmless spyware cookie now and then that Vista never had.
Wonderful you say?...well I would not say any OS is wonderful but Vista IHMO is a better OS/ tool then XP,infact I'll say its the best OS so far from Microsoft,I got a feeling Windows 7 will improve on Vista(I hope so since it means things just go from better to better).
Btw it works both ways I would not call XP great or wondeful,infact if I look at XP in its first couple of years with all the BSODs etc..Vista has it beat for stability for sure,some people have short memories around here,yes I was using XP when it was was released so remember all the issues it had,it took 2 service packs to get it half decent on security.
I'll let you know when my Dell Vista laptop has its first crash or BSOD,none so far,my Vista x64 has been solid now for over 6 months which is an awesome feat from such a young new OS when I consider how many games I put it through.
Before anybody calls me a Vista fan I would remind you I was gaming back in the good old DOS 6.22 days,Win3.11 was the only OS that I did not like,Win 95 paved the way for 98/XP etc...and I have used virtually every OS from Microsoft.
My opinion is XP was ok,Vista is better and I'm fairly confident Windows 7 will be even better,however I miss my old DOS 6.22 days,you guys have got it so easy nowadays.
End of the day we are are all entitled to our opinions.
Its certainly nowhere near as bad as it was in 9x. In 9x the system would become incredibly unstable over time. With XP its less of a matter of overt crashing, just this general dirty feeling that comes from junk accumulating in the system. Programs dont completely uninstall themselves, etc etc. With XP, you dont really *have* to reinstall, but when you finally do, it just feels snappier than the one youve had installed for a year. Vista on the other hand seems to run as well as it did on day one, despite all of the crap I've installed.
I still think people's impressions of Vista being slower on a modern PC has more to do with the the psychological impression of the system bogging down due to constant disk access, rather than it actually slowing down. On an older laptop with slower video, there was a *slight* delay in the general snappiness of the OS, but to call Vista "slow and sluggish" is a bit absurd IMO. It was still snappy on the 1GB/1.2ghz celeron/radeon 9000 mobile laptop.
If we were all using silent solid state disks where we wouldnt hear and dwell on all the crunching, I'd think impressions would be very different. For example:
Sure, it takes a while to create that cache. The disk is often grinding away. It takes several minutes on boot to fill my 4gb of ram, let alone any readyboost. But the system is perfectly usable, despite the crunching. You dont need to wait for the disk access to stop. I've fired up COD4 within a minute of logging on, before it had even made a dent in filling superfetch, and there wasnt a hitch in actual gameplay or noticeably slower loading times. The disk sure was crunching like hell for the next 5 minutes, but it had zero impact on performance. But then again, I havent rebooted in weeks (sleep mode FTW), so the several minutes of crunchiness upon boot really dont bother me. Nowadays S3 suspend for desktops and hibernate for laptops works so well that fully shutting down for anything but a forced restart just seems so retro.
soonerproud
Golden Member
You obviously are or you would not be mentioning it in the first place.
Because people actually spend their money on this stuff to begin with. If these users did not care about security/stability they would never spend the money on this stuff.
Again, if the person thought it was useless, they would tell the salesman where to stick their advice. Money talks and bullshit walks.
And you are exaggerating about the issues people are having with Vista. I am very well aware of the problems people are having with Vista, and most are related to poor drivers and poor third party software. The fact you are unwilling to even acknowledge this is proof you are no better a expert than I am. At least I try to help people resolve these issues instead of telling them a bunch of garbage about how much rosier it is on the XP side of things. I never claimed to be an expert, but you did.
You missed the point that XP in this same stage was much worse when it came to drivers causing blue screens and crashes. You are correct, it does not matter who's fault it is to the user. This is why XP was sooooooooo hated until SP2. My how short of a memory people have. People like you just make the situation worse when you rant on how crappy Vista is instead of helping people find real solutions to a problem. I have not seen you once in this thread offer legitimate advice on how to fix some issues in Vista.
And most people I know do love Vista. It doesn't mean either you or I are representative of the average user just because the people we know feel a certain way about something. The difference between me and you is I don't tell these people how much Vista sucks, and instead do something to help them fix the issue.
This all started because you took my original post to you in an offensive manner when it was clearly intended in a joking manner. It is funny you leave out the part where I was winking at you to make it out like this was a serious post on my part. Go look at the first reply I made to you again, because it was made in a purely good natured jest.
People are complaining because people like you are doing nothing but telling them how much Vista sucks while you do nothing to help them resolve their issues. People do care about the end results of what the new driver model and sound stack. They just don't know the specifics. All they know is that their computer is a lot more stable and less prone to viruses when set up properly. The it's just XP but prettier crowd are people that have been duped into believing that by people like you who fail to inform them other wise and continue to spread FUD about Vista.
User rot is my term for it. Everyone else here understood exactly what I was talking about but you. Go ahead and stick your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist, because it does. You don't have to treat it badly, just use XP for any extended period of time and it slows down. The only way to completely fix is to reinstall.
While we are on spyware and other junk, people will be much less inclined to become infested with Vista than XP.
I was talking about the rest of the people in this thread, not us. Our conversation has degraded and I was hoping to steer it in a little more positive direction to avoid having the thread locked. I take responsibility for my actions in causing this in the first place by criticizing your grammar.
I never said Vista was the best thing since sliced bread. I just believe it is technically superior to XP, that is all. I also believe Debian is technically superior to both Vista and XP, but I wouldn't recommend it to the average user due to it being rough around the edges. Vista however is really stable and solid. It is a great upgrade for a new computer.
You continue to act like XP is the end all be all of operating systems, and that is just not true.
Griffinhart
Golden Member
The term is bit rot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rot
And XP definately suffers from it. Google that term and XP and you will see plenty on the subject.
VinDSL
Diamond Member
Heh! I wish I had a dime for every time I've said this... 🙂
Even hardcore, barking seal, Vista lovers are opposed to this idea! Why?
I *guess* it's because it'll cost you money - maybe more money than Vista itself! 😀
To stop all the 'disk grinding', all you have to do is install 4GB RAM & 4GB ReadyBoost...
SuperFetch is smart enough to figure out when YOU are not around, and Vista will do it's thing then - if you give it a chance! This will never happen though, if you aren't running ReadyBoost and/or have a ReadyDrive - ReadyBoost being the most important of the two.
If you have SuperFetch/ReadyBoost/ReadyDrive setup and running on your machine, 'disk grinding' becomes a thing of the past...
Oh, well, carry on... 😉
Well, I'll have to disagree with you on one thing - readyboost isnt going to solve much of any random disk grinding that isnt caused by having too little memory. Everything written to the stick is going to be mirrored on the drive, and most of the random crunching is caused by background tasks such that deal more with writes such as indexing, system restore, etc.
OTOH, I've found that Vista seems to like to use the RB stick to duplicate much of what is typically in your superfetch cache, so often after closing a large program and leaving a gap of free memory, itll silently turn to the RB stick instead of the HD to refill the memory.
I really dont find it necessary to have RB when you have 4GB anyway. All the ram helps, and 4GB is quite nice, but even that is already so much extra space compared to what the OS and programs use that theres probably very little data to put on that RB stick that isnt already covered by SF. It might make refilling SF a little faster and quieter in that case, but I'm at the point where I dont equate disk grinding anymore with something being wrong/slowdown, so it doesnt bother me.
RB is a bit of a dirty hack to hold us over until SSDs become more available/affordable - when they do, it'll be quite nice to never have to hear disk thrashing ever again.
apoppin
Lifer
i hear my name being called .. please don't irritate this old monkey unless you want him to bite you back! :|
-Look it's already been *covered* .... some people simply aren't (1) able to comprehend OR (2) they don't WANT to 😛
-i can't help those people and i would be stupid for even trying. 30K+ posts has given me the wisdom to not argue endlessly with people whose sole purpose is to argue. i can usually spot them right away and i am done posting here in a troll thread whose OP only wants to rant, not ask for help.
--He didn't ask for help - my mistake for being here at all
i gave my *opinion* a couple of times backed by everyone who actually knows better .. who actually imo is smart enough to run Vista with NO problems whatsoever. i really don't care about your - what i consider to be an extremely uninformed opinion that runs against all technical knowledge - or other uninformed opinions - even if it is a majority here. You just want to argue - well, keep your XP and go down with the XP ship - no one who runs Vista really gives a crap.
:roll:
But you are right - my *mistake* was to post in a troll thread. Don't reply to me and i won't be back. You Vista haters can have it back. Sorry i entered; and i am Sorry for my opinion and my interruption here .. carry on without mentioning me
Maximilian
Lifer
Well ive never encountered it, or notied it. Fair enough though! it may be a factor with XP that i have simply not encountered. Just like the problems i and many others have had with vista that many of you have not encountered. It goes both ways.
Well again thats good to know, but it dosent help those who do have issues does it. Ive got an audigy 2ZS on my desktop with ultimate x64, no issues, im told its a pointless card now because of the new sound stack but whatever i get sound. However with an audigy 2 NX on my laptop, there were problems. Worked in the end but it took some effort.
Its not up there with XP, its close.
I would never recommend anyone to "upgrade" to vista, if everythings fine with their XP install, then they should leave it alone. If theyre building a new rig then they should have the knowledge to make their own decision and wouldnt ask me for advice in the first place, if they did i would say vista x64, as x32 is pointless. But XP is still a very good OS and it should not be dismissed so easily. Ill recommend based on what i think will give them the least problems. XP support wont be dropped for a long time to come, valve hardware survey shows something like 80% of people still use XP.
In my experience neither is easily crashable. They both crash with faulty hardware, they both crash with faulty drivers, the only benefit i see from vista from a stability point of view is that ctrl+alt+delete never fails to take the screen back from an offending application. Thats it though.
Yes, and im far from the irrational vista FUD spammer that some seem to think *cough* SOONERPROUD *cough*, i use both XP and Vista x64, they have their purposes. Im just far less easily impressed than some are, and my overall opinion is that for the time it took vista really underwhelmed me and the issues with 8xxx cards, creative sound cards, forgetting folder view settings and oh ive remembered a new one, installing a network port driver update from windows update knackered my onboard LAN port on my desktop (the only desktop issue encountered). I was not impressed. Im glad some are problem free thats good, but many arent and its a valid point when i say vista is far from ideal for some people and thats why XP can be the better option.
Maximilian
Lifer
Oh so any topic i mention or bring up is an obsession is it? I like a good game of company of heros now and then, does me bringing that up mean im obsessed with that game huh? No, you simply refuse to accept an opinion thats your problem.
Yeah because the guy from the store/IT repair shop convinced them to buy it. Deja Vous? Im repeating myself here, i said this to you before....
Wrong.
You are aware hmm? Youve said that you havent had a single damn problem with vista. How does that qualify you to preach about how good vista is? Im talking from actual lengthly experience from the OS. I have helped several people solve issues, the most recent of them have actually been from the CoH gamereplays.org chat room where people moan about various things including their vista woes which i help them with, recent one was a guy using 165.xx drivers for his card, these cause TDR errors, speaking from experience here. Unlike you who assume everything is fine with vista because you have no problems. Its a selfish way to think.
Im not saying i hate vista use XP instead as you seem to think, im saying theres issues with vista and people should be wary of these when dealing with an OS upgrade and that XP is far from the outdated thing you make it out to be, its still an option is all.
Thats because you turned this thread into an arguement, theres no issues to be solved in an arguement. Heres some legitimate advice for you
1. Learn to respect other peoples opinion
2. Just because things work for YOU dosent mean they work for EVERYONE ELSE
I havent seen you try and solve any issues either, i dont tell people vista sucks what the hell, your just making crap up now. I tell people to be wary, i dont tell them its bad, i dont tell them to expect a lot either. Most people i know dont love vista, you seem to refuse to accept this and put it down to me not helping them?! I am very helpful to those i know who have vista, i helped most of them choose their hardware.
I find the simpsons, south park and also family guy amusing. I didnt find you amusing. Learn humor.
Blah blah youve said the same thing the past 3 paragraphs... "i tell them vista sucks" No, youve got me mixed up with someone else.
Like i said to BD2003 in my other post ive never encountered user rot, so i wont comment on it, its likely an issue i havent encountered due to the way i use my comp or maybe i dont use an XP install for long enough whatever, i accept that.
BUT, you refuse to accept the valid problems with vista which by your own admittance you have 0 experience with because everythings rosy for you, i am telling people about vista based on my experiences with it.
Well you completely failed to steer it in any positive direction as all your doing is spewing vista loving trash.
I didnt say XP was the best OS either, i said it is still a viable option. Someone has problems with vista, what have they got, theres linux and thats just asking for trouble (unless they know what they are doing), OSX.... well maybe, but it may be too unfamiliar if they are used to windows, so what else is like windows but isnt vista... hmm XP! Yes, vistas predecessor, im citing it to be a reliable, stable OS and defintaley still has many years left in it. Its not become suddenly worthless just because its replacement is out like you seem to think.
Mem
Lifer
I should of said for new systems,ie all the recommendations I have made are for new laptops with Vista,as to upgrades that's really down to the user.
XP is a very good OS,well you could say samething about 2K,infact XP was not as big a jump from 2K to XP as XP to Vista is.
End of the day some people forget there are other very good operating systems around,just as good or even better then XP.
Drivers are never the fault of the OS,remember the old Via 4 in 1 drivers that caused havoc with XP in those early days?..Obviously drivers are down to the hardware manufacturer and not the OS.You can thank Creative for the most part,they killed off all the good competition and then never fully opened the sound market, they have only themselves to blame.
Not quite true,the new sound system in Vista alone makes it more robust to crashing,a lot of the crashes with XP were caused by sound driver bugs etc ,Microsoft decided to correct the problem with the new sound system and tighter driver requirements ,its supposed to restart the sound rather then bring the whole OS down (like in XP)etc..I have to say XP had more then its fair share of BSOD in its the early days .
I guess being an elite member doesn't mean you know how to read.
Not a troll thread. Ranting? maybe some of it, like the second title line from mostly frustration. And no, I didn't ask for help, I knew that things that worked fine for me in XP didn't work in Vista. I needed a system up and running to get some things done. I did what I had to to be able to do that.
And as is evident from replies like yours and others it wouldn't have done me any good to ask for help in the first place. Apparently my Vista experience was because, according to you, I'm "not smart enough" to run Vista, or like others have told me, I just don't have good software or good drivers or good memory.
Sorry mr elite, but I'll just say it again. I really don't care much about operating systems. I want my computer to work with the programs I choose so I can get things done. Vista wasn't doing it, XP does. For me, that's the end of the story.
apoppin
Lifer
i read too well 😛
You're Op and you did NOT ask for help
you posted this *rant*
so i gave you my *Opinion* - you can't figure it out
-too bad for you - who cares anymore?😛
if you JUST want to rant leave me OUT of it [further] - i acknowledged MY MISTAKE in posting in a troll thread.
😱
If you want HELP with Vista, start a *new* 'Help thread' and i will be first in line to assist you
:gift:
soonerproud
Golden Member
Stating your opinion once is ok but repeating it over and over how you think I wasted my money is an obsession. I can accept your opinion, I just don't understand why you could not accept mine that I got a good deal and leave it alone. You keep repeating I am wasting my money, not the other way around.
And I am repeating myself that if the person did not think it was important, they would tell the salesman where to shove their advice. You lost on this one, the money trail talk.
Right, I haven't had a single problem with Vista. The reason for that is I did research on how to properly set up and use Vista. I also experimented with various tweaks, and reversed them when they caused problems. I installed software like nero, saw what it did and uninstalled it because it was causing issues and replaced it with open source alternatives. I guarantee I can run circles around you on setting up Vista to work in it's most efficient manner. I have done it for three different people in the last few months, and all of them are extremely pleased with Vista.
Just because I said I never had any problems, does not imply others around me have not. You are the one drawing that conclusion.
But you did say you would take every opportunity to bash Vista did you not? You call me a hypocrite and accuse me of back peddling, yet that is precisely what you are doing here. How many times do I have to repeat myself that there are situations when XP is appropriate? I already said this previously many times, yet you keep implying I only recommend Vista. I know XP is a legitimate alternative to Vista in certain cases. The OP is one of those cases where he has software and hardware that is not playing nice with Vista. You notice I have not once told him he was wrong on choosing XP over Vista?
You should really learn to take your own advice. No, really you started this from your first lengthy reply to a one line statement I made to you in a obvious joking manner. The tone of your reply was pretty shitty to begin with and had something to do with how I responded to you in the first place. Now let me reword your second piece of advice to apply to you.
2. Just because things don't work for YOU doesn't mean they don't work for EVERYONE ELSE
You better go back and read this thread again because I spent some time trying to help The Boston Dangler in this very thread.
You did too say Vista sucks, not only that you claim it is not worth the money.
Sure looks like you said Vista sucks to me. Like I said before, who cares what the people around you think. They are not representative of the average user, no matter what you think. You never once offered any helpful advice in this thread whatsoever, so what am I supposed to conclude from that?
Get a sense of humor. I can't help it if you don't have one.
You did tell people Vista sucks. I already proved it up above.
I can accept you never encountered it for whatever reason. I never doubted that in fact.
I said I never had problems with Vista. You are the one who keeps reading that as meaning that no one has problems with Vista. Maybe I don't have problems with Vista because I am experienced?
And all you are doing is making yourself look foolish by back peddling and contradicting yourself. I am done with you and will reply to you no more in this thread as I have had enough of your flip flopping and your spewing uninformed comments. That is the most positive thing I can do to steer this thread away from this argument, which you started.
You absolutely did state that.
Which you were proved wrong on by several posters. I never said it was worthless or had no use because Vista is out. Quit putting words in my mouth.
blackangst1
Lifer
Wow from your responses I thought I was in P&N for a minute 😛
Dadofamunky
Platinum Member
It just seems to me like Microsoft made a huge botch of their Vista launch. Why in Bill's name would you offer FOUR different flavors of the OS (x2 when you consider the 64-Bit versions of each as well)? They first tried that crap with XP, remember - XP Home vs. XP Pro?
I think they do it because Microsoft's marketing department is hideously bloated and they had to have four versions so everyone would have something to pitch to their market segment. In any case, it's pure idiocy and clearly shows what an incompetent CEO Steve Ballmer is. Microsoft needs to fire about 3/4 of their marketing, get rid of Ballmer and bring someone in who knows how to run a software company.
Microsoft should just get rid of every other version and only sell Vista Ultimate, call it Windows Vista, cut the price again, and get it over with. This market segmentation crap is the worst thing Microsoft has ever done to hamstring itself as a company. It's probably the main reason why Vista is such rubbish to so many people. And what a great way to spread your developer talent thin!
Me, I remember how ugly XP was at first (and HATED the Home vs Pro concept) until two SP's came through. XP still performs like crap on my work system (not so bad on my Athlon X2, but that's because I've optimized the crap out of it).
And what makes these guys think Windows 7 will be any better? I'm sorry, Ballmer will go down eventually as one of the worst CEOs in history.
Yeah, I did the same thing, and PowerDVD runs like a tank now, with Blu-Ray! It's the first thing I've done with my new rig that I haven't ever done on my XP system (only because the XP system has no expandability and the CPU power is now a bit lacking).
It's gotta be Version 7.3.
Sorry for the threadjacking...
I think they do it because Microsoft's marketing department is hideously bloated and they had to have four versions so everyone would have something to pitch to their market segment. In any case, it's pure idiocy and clearly shows what an incompetent CEO Steve Ballmer is. Microsoft needs to fire about 3/4 of their marketing, get rid of Ballmer and bring someone in who knows how to run a software company.
Microsoft should just get rid of every other version and only sell Vista Ultimate, call it Windows Vista, cut the price again, and get it over with. This market segmentation crap is the worst thing Microsoft has ever done to hamstring itself as a company. It's probably the main reason why Vista is such rubbish to so many people. And what a great way to spread your developer talent thin!
Me, I remember how ugly XP was at first (and HATED the Home vs Pro concept) until two SP's came through. XP still performs like crap on my work system (not so bad on my Athlon X2, but that's because I've optimized the crap out of it).
And what makes these guys think Windows 7 will be any better? I'm sorry, Ballmer will go down eventually as one of the worst CEOs in history.
Yeah, I did the same thing, and PowerDVD runs like a tank now, with Blu-Ray! It's the first thing I've done with my new rig that I haven't ever done on my XP system (only because the XP system has no expandability and the CPU power is now a bit lacking).
It's gotta be Version 7.3.
Sorry for the threadjacking...
I _think_ (from what I have read... others here may know better) that what happened is this: there were fewer versions to begin with, each with pretty stiff hardware requirements, some of which would have prevented any system with Intel integrated graphics from getting a Vista compatibility sticker. Intel had a little chat with MS senior management, and voila! there was suddenly a lower-end version with a Vista _capability_ sticker that Intel's crappy GMA could qualify for. There was quite a lot of opposition to this on the Vista team internally, and it's been blogged about recently as a bunch of internal emails came to light.
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: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
