apoppin
Lifer
so ... Vista ... right now is a bit of extra bother and ... work
that's a *reason* for me to hold-off till SP2 or DX 10 games *require* it.
or should i jump on the bandwagon?
misery loves company
:heart:
that's a *reason* for me to hold-off till SP2 or DX 10 games *require* it.
or should i jump on the bandwagon?
misery loves company
:heart:
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
Originally posted by: apoppin
so ... Vista ... right now is a bit of extra bother and ... work
that's a *reason* for me to hold-off till SP2 or DX 10 games *require* it.
or should i jump on the bandwagon?
misery loves company
:heart:
It won't cook your breakfast or clean your room
,I don't find it a bother to be honest,installs very fast compared to XP,bootup time is quick(guess this is down to what startup software and ram you have).I installed XP when it first came out and Vista compared to XP when it was first released is a lot more stable,Vista right now with all the latest patches from Windows update seems very solid to me,as to upgrading I guess you'll have too sooner or later for DX10 gaming,having Vista installed now lets you see how everything runs and what has changed and moved compared to XP,plus the things you love and hate about it.
SP1 is due second half of this year I believe,to be honest I don't think SP1 will improve stability or performance with Vista,drivers by then will be where the main improvements are in Vista.
It's always hard to answer "should I install Vista " for other members since everybody will have a different experience with it depending on hardware/software they use.I have about 15 games installed at the moment on my Vista x64 and a lot of my old favourite software that I use from XP which all seem to work fine,I was impressed with the gaming compatibility of Vista, a lot better then I expected.
I wanted to be an early adopter of Vista so that I could get used the whole system. After being disappointed, I didn't want to throw Vista away. My plan now is to wait to try Vista after each service pack, and keeping XP until the next Windows version comes out if I keep getting disappointed.Originally posted by: apoppin
so ... Vista ... right now is a bit of extra bother and ... work
that's a *reason* for me to hold-off till SP2 or DX 10 games *require* it.
or should i jump on the bandwagon?
misery loves company
:heart:
The only real DX10 game coming out is going to be Crysis and that's delayed until who knows when. I'm sure you'll want to check out the DX10 goodness there though.
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
Originally posted by: VIAN
I wanted to be an early adopter of Vista so that I could get used the whole system. After being disappointed, I didn't want to throw Vista away. My plan now is to wait to try Vista after each service pack, and keeping XP until the next Windows version comes out if I keep getting disappointed.Originally posted by: apoppin
so ... Vista ... right now is a bit of extra bother and ... work
that's a *reason* for me to hold-off till SP2 or DX 10 games *require* it.
or should i jump on the bandwagon?
misery loves company
:heart:
The only real DX10 game coming out is going to be Crysis and that's delayed until who knows when. I'm sure you'll want to check out the DX10 goodness there though.
VIAN how much time did you have Vista installed for?..took me awhile to get used to it like I have already stated and now everything seems so natural.UAC you either like or hate ,but can be disabled,took me 2 weeks or so to get used to that which I leave enabled (added security).
apoppin
Lifer
so we have two PoVs ... well represented by Mem's low expectations being exceeded and VIAN's *distasteful* experience
that tells me ... only me ... to wait ... there is no "need" for Vista --for me, whatsoever --YET
am i really *missing* the "experience" by waiting?
that tells me ... only me ... to wait ... there is no "need" for Vista --for me, whatsoever --YET
am i really *missing* the "experience" by waiting?
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
Originally posted by: apoppin
so we have two PoVs ... well represented by Mem's low expectations being exceeded and VIAN's *distasteful* experience
that tells me ... only me ... to wait ... there is no "need" for Vista --for me, whatsoever --YET
am i really *missing* the "experience" by waiting?
Early adopters will know there way round Vista like back of their hand,also have their Vista in ship shape working order well before SP1,plus everything will seem very natural in use
.I rather experience it now then later,by time SP1 is here I've a diploma in Vista
.
apoppin
Lifer
that's what makes this thread useful ... the opposite PoVs well expressed
i expect mine to change ... sooner-or-later
and i will keep watching these threads
i expect mine to change ... sooner-or-later
and i will keep watching these threads
And why did he, like myself, know where every is located? Because everything was more or less the same as 98/2000. Why did so much of the interface remain unchanged? Because there was nothing wrong with it to begin with. There was no need to change something that didn't need changing. However, to create a whole new "Vista experience" Microsoft changed many aspects of the interface simply for the sake of making changes. It was quantity over quality.
The problem is not that we need to learn and familiarize ourselves with this new interface. The problem is that when we put the XP interface and the Vista interface together side by side and compare the two, the XP interface was better and made more sense than the new one. Unless, of course, you're saying the Vista interface is actually better and more user-friendly.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
That's highly debatable. Just because you're used to something doesn't automatically mean it's good.
Oh please, I'm sure MS was just sitting around going "So, how can we confuse people with this release?".
There definitely are aspects that are better, like the bread crumb paths in explorer that MS stole from Nautilus. But I haven't used Vista enough to really name any major improvements.
Maximilian
Lifer
- Feb 8, 2004
- 12,604
- 15
- 81
Originally posted by: apoppin
so we have two PoVs ... well represented by Mem's low expectations being exceeded and VIAN's *distasteful* experience
that tells me ... only me ... to wait ... there is no "need" for Vista --for me, whatsoever --YET
am i really *missing* the "experience" by waiting?
Poverty stricken citizen?
VIAN, you say that XP's start menu is superior to the classic one. By XP start menu do you mean that thing with the "all programs" part at the bottom? and a bunch of stuff above it? Does vista not have the option to use the classic programs/documents/settings/search start menu thats been around for 12 years??? Thats not fair!
Im not leaving XP until they stop coding for direct X 9, screw vista, its extra hassle i dont really need. Im intrigued by it as i was with linux when i installed that, then realised i didnt need it at all and was happier with XP.
Name 3 things that you really dislike about XP's interface. Then look at Vista. Did it address your issues?
And also, I'm aware of the fact that if I'm used to the old interface, it doesn't mean it's good from an objective standpoint. I'm very used to driving a 1990 Corolla and to me it feels very natural while my mom's 2004 Corolla seems a bit awkward. But does that make the 1990 model better? No. The 2004 model is better in pretty much every aspect, and for every change I could see a very clear reason as to why the change took place and what benefits it yielded. It simply felt awkward driving it because I'm not used to the ergonomics of the newer model. Vista is a whole different story. There are no obvious reason to change the Start Menu, and there are no obvious benefits from the new Start Menu. The same goes for most of the other interface changes.
Well there you go. I understand that there were lots of performance and functionality improvements, but interface-wise there isn't really anything that jumps out and makes you think "Wow, that change they made really helped to improve the interface and made Vista a more user-friendly environment than XP." And again, I am strictly talking about the interface and nothing else. If Vista had the XP interface (with Aero effects) then I wouldn't be sitting here typing this up.
Originally posted by: apoppin
so we have two PoVs ... well represented by Mem's low expectations being exceeded and VIAN's *distasteful* experience
that tells me ... only me ... to wait ... there is no "need" for Vista --for me, whatsoever --YET
am i really *missing* the "experience" by waiting?
Actually one PoV has used Vista for a few hours, one has used it for weeks. If you are using these two PoV to make a judgement I would recommend:
#1 Don't. Go find more info outside this thread or go demo it for yourself.
#2 If you still do, go with the obviously more informed decision.
IMHO yeah you are missing the experience. I'm not going to stay behind and debate it though. I've had my install going since November, it's awesome, and I'm not looking back.
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
Originally posted by: Smilin
Originally posted by: apoppin
so we have two PoVs ... well represented by Mem's low expectations being exceeded and VIAN's *distasteful* experience
that tells me ... only me ... to wait ... there is no "need" for Vista --for me, whatsoever --YET
am i really *missing* the "experience" by waiting?
Actually one PoV has used Vista for a few hours, one has used it for weeks. If you are using these two PoV to make a judgement I would recommend:
#1 Don't. Go find more info outside this thread or go demo it for yourself.
#2 If you still do, go with the obviously more informed decision.
IMHO yeah you are missing the experience. I'm not going to stay behind and debate it though. I've had my install going since November, it's awesome, and I'm not looking back.
Few weeks?.....how did you come to that conclusion,more like 2 months for the official version.
By start menu, I mean all the functionality that clicking the start button provides. But I also kind of feel like the User folder in the start menu, which replaced My Documents in XP, is also a big part of it because I use it so much. I would've preferred more customization of the start menu and User folder with Vista, but it is more limited than XP.
What isn't fair?
That would've been sweet.
Do I really need weeks to see that Vista is more user friendly? The answer is an obvious no. If Vista was more user friendly, then I would have no difficulty understanding why they made changes and even embrace them.
For instance, when installing Vista, it shows you all the partitions in a fancy new interface that WAS more user friendly. Right away I was impressed. It didn't take weeks for me to be impressed with that change.
Another change I like is the information panel in windows. At the bottom of every window there is a space that tells you a lot of information about a file. All you have to do is click once on a file and the information displays. This is much faster and more comprehensive than XP where you hold your mouse over the icon and hope that it pops up, and even then it doesn't display nearly enough information.
I repeat, it doesn't take weeks to figure out the benefits of something. In my few hours I was impressed by some new features, but I was also disappointed by some others. The start menu is a big deal for me. I access all of my files: programs, documents, pictures, and videos via the start menu. XP's start menu is faster and more intuitive than Vista's or the classic.
For instance, when installing Vista, it shows you all the partitions in a fancy new interface that WAS more user friendly. Right away I was impressed. It didn't take weeks for me to be impressed with that change.
Another change I like is the information panel in windows. At the bottom of every window there is a space that tells you a lot of information about a file. All you have to do is click once on a file and the information displays. This is much faster and more comprehensive than XP where you hold your mouse over the icon and hope that it pops up, and even then it doesn't display nearly enough information.
I repeat, it doesn't take weeks to figure out the benefits of something. In my few hours I was impressed by some new features, but I was also disappointed by some others. The start menu is a big deal for me. I access all of my files: programs, documents, pictures, and videos via the start menu. XP's start menu is faster and more intuitive than Vista's or the classic.
Vian is our newest anti-Vista troll! Stand up and clap your hands everyone. Give a hand to Vian.
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
No big deal for me,I pin some programs to start menu like I do in XP,the rest that I use often I make a quick launch icon in taskbar ie firefox,printmaster,mail,media centre etc.., games I leave in Games menu(I could stick them where I like).The rest of the programs I leave in the default all programs menu section.
I only have one icon on my desktop and that's only the recycle bin,you could say I'm well organised.It's more or less very similar to how I had my XP laid out.
I'm also very well organized. So organized that I seldom use the search feature in Windows. My XP start menu consists of up to 6 mostly used programs, chosen by Windows, which includes a calculator, notepad, Word, and steam. That's all there is on the left. On the right I have My Documents, My Computer, Control Panel, Help & support, search and run. The last three I rarely use, but have for, just in case, quick access.
My quicklaunch houses programs that I use even more often than those found in the start menu. Firefox, itunes, Media player classic.
My All Programs programs are all in their default locations. Although I have considered rounding up all my games into one game folder, I just didn't feel too annoyed by the default system.
Your being organized and the Vista start menu being bad are two completely different things. My computer is off-the-charts organized and I still hate the new start menu because there will always be times when you need to use the start menu.
apoppin
Lifer
Originally posted by: Smilin
Originally posted by: apoppin
so we have two PoVs ... well represented by Mem's low expectations being exceeded and VIAN's *distasteful* experience
that tells me ... only me ... to wait ... there is no "need" for Vista --for me, whatsoever --YET
am i really *missing* the "experience" by waiting?
Actually one PoV has used Vista for a few hours, one has used it for weeks. If you are using these two PoV to make a judgement I would recommend:
#1 Don't. Go find more info outside this thread or go demo it for yourself.
#2 If you still do, go with the obviously more informed decision.
IMHO yeah you are missing the experience. I'm not going to stay behind and debate it though. I've had my install going since November, it's awesome, and I'm not looking back.
i *know* Mr MS ... your most unbiased opinion of Vista
and cut the ridicule ... you WORK for Microsoft as an employee and only identify yourself when it suits you.
:Q
i *did* try the RC2 and did not find it "compelling" for me in my situation to migrate yet
it's still Winter
Spr1ng is on the way
I just installed Vista on Saturday and I understand some of Vain's comments I spent quite a while trying to find things that were second nature finding in XP however now that I've started to get used to vista I'm starting to really like the new interface.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
I can do the first without much problem but I don't have a Vista machine handy with which to compare.
Better and worse are subjective, so if you like the '90 model better then yes, it's better.
The same is true for cars, there's virtually no reason to change the interface and yet every car's internal layout is different with each revision.
The bread crumb paths in explorer is easily one of those things, I use it all of the time in Nautilus so it was really annoying not having it available when I was forced to use an XP machine.
Real user friendliness is a myth, people who don't understand computers are going to be afraid to touch them no matter how simple the UI seems to be and those who do understand them will take the time to learn how to actually use it. So yes, it should take a few weeks to acclimate yourself to the new environment.
No it's not subjective. If a car is better, it's better. I find it very hard to believe that Toyota made no technological improvements in 14 years of R&D. Like I said, I don't like the old model better, I'm just more used to the interior layout. However, despite not being used to the 2004 model's interior, I can clearly see why the changes took place and how they benefit me. I can't say the same about Vista's UI though. You can't either because you haven't really used it much yet, so I don't see why you feel the need to dispute this.
Actually there is a reason: to improve the ergonomics and aesthetics (mostly aesthetics). And like I said, the improvements can be clearly seen. Vista's start menu's improvements are nowhere to be seen. It leaves you scratching your head wondering why they bothered to change it.
I like that feature as well because I can clearly see how that can increase productivity. However, I said "most" interface changes seem pointless, and the start menu is at the top of that list.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
Which is the same thing comparing XP and Vista's UI and that part is subjective.
And once again, aesthetics is the perception beauty which is highly subjective. Obviously moving some things around to make them easier to reach and crap makes sense but since people come in different shapes and sizes you'll never be able to please them all. Luckily computers aren't in the same boat and a UI change doesn't mean you have to stretch farther to the right to run Outlook now.
If you put the name of a program into the search dialog does that run it? If so I would think the point is that you're supposed the use that as the primary interface now. It would definitely be easier for the things that you're starting all of the time, as long as you can spell them anyway. =)
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