Thoroughly disgusted with Vista 64-bit so far

[archcommus]

Well I just built the system in my sig and of course that requires Vista 64-bit to be able to use all 4 GB of memory. Although my daily usage is mostly just fine, I am very disappointed with stupid little things with this OS so far.

First, on installation it told me drivers were missing for my PATA DVD drive. Okay, then please tell me Vista how you booted off the disc and read all the setup files in the first place? Retarded. And how could it possibly not have simple IDE controller drivers? Turned out the fix ended up being to set the DVD driver to SLAVE even though it's the only device on the cable. This is not just something I made up, it was a documented solution on at least two other forums and worked for me as well. Absolutely ridiculous to expect someone to come up with something like that, and this was not a problem with 32-bit Vista.

Next, it completely failed to be able to get a proper IP address from the DHCP server of my router. The router is only 3 years old. After hours of research the problem appeared to be that Vista sets the broadcast flag in a DHCP request packet to 1, and older routers do not support this. Instead of just flipping the 1 to a 0 if the initial request fails to see if that works, instead Vista just decides to report an "unidentified network" and give up trying to get an IP address. This flag had to be forced to 0 manually in the registry, and EVEN after that it still fails to get an IP address and reports unidentified network about half the time. This problem may be for both 32 and 64-bit versions.

Third, there is no way to disable driver signature enforcement if you want to actually have all the latest updates without rebooting and choosing that option from the boot menu. I really don't see why this couldn't be something the user could choose if he/she wants to load an untrusted driver. This means to run PeerGuardian I must specifically remove at least a half dozen updates and run some commands at a prompt, or reboot and choose the special mode before every time I want to launch it.

And finally, Hauppauge PVR-150 drivers do not work in 64-bit with 4 GB or more of memory. I'm not sure if this is Hauppauge's fault or Microsoft's fault, they both blame each other, but after this OS has been out for nearly a year and a half, it's really just something that shouldn't exist and adds to my frustration.

I can't even use 64-bit IE due to my add-ons being 32-bit only. Really I'm not gaining anything from 64-bit except for being able to use all 4 GB of my memory.

 

[George P Burdell]

Originally posted by: archcommus
Third, there is no way to disable driver signature enforcement if you want to actually have all the latest updates without rebooting and choosing that option from the boot menu. I really don't see why this couldn't be something the user could choose if he/she wants to load an untrusted driver. This means to run PeerGuardian I must specifically remove at least a half dozen updates and run some commands at a prompt, or reboot and choose the special mode before every time I want to launch it.

Annoying as this may be, it helps keep Vista stable by guarding against rogue third-party drivers.

In any case, I run PeerGuardian on Vista x64 without any problems. I had to enable testing mode and sign the PeerGuardian drivers myself. Search for a post by SynthDude2001 explaining this in detail.

 

[ViRGE]

For the Hauppauge drivers, that is most certainly a problem on their end. Hauppauge isn't known for producing great drivers, even their newer products released after Vista weren't 64bit safe. They have made several beta driver releases that I know about this year with 4GB fixes for various products. I am told this driver may fix your issues, but since I don't have a PVR-150 I can't test it myself.

And George is right about driver signing, it really is a good thing. If it could be disabled on a whim by the user, then it would be trivial for malware to disable it and embed itself as a driver/rootkit.

 

[Mem]

And finally, Hauppauge PVR-150 drivers do not work in 64-bit with 4 GB or more of memory. I'm not sure if this is Hauppauge's fault or Microsoft's fault, they both blame each other, but after this OS has been out for nearly a year and a half, it's really just something that shouldn't exist and adds to my frustration.

Sure its Hauppauge fault,one reason why I went with Leadtek Winfast for my DTV tuner,they had great working drivers for my Vista x64 within 5 weeks of Vista's release(well done Leadtek!)...shame some companies can't do the same even after a year!.

I can't even use 64-bit IE due to my add-ons being 32-bit only. Really I'm not gaining anything from 64-bit except for being able to use all 4 GB of my memory.

That's really down to the software companies in general to release 64 bit software etc...personally I use 32 bit Firefox with 64 bit Thunderbird,nothing much you can do until more 64 bit software becomes more popular and available.

Third, there is no way to disable driver signature enforcement if you want to actually have all the latest updates without rebooting and choosing that option from the boot menu. I really don't see why this couldn't be something the user could choose if he/she wants to load an untrusted driver. This means to run PeerGuardian I must specifically remove at least a half dozen updates and run some commands at a prompt, or reboot and choose the special mode before every time I want to launch it.

I actually like digital signed drivers,better security as already been stated,I've not had any driver issues where they were not digitally signed even for beta drivers I have used,again it all depends on what drivers you really need to use.

 

[hurtstotalktoyou]

I'm also pretty disgusted with Vista. I run a Core 2 Duo E6300 @ 2.8 GHz, with 1GB RAM and a 64MB GeForce 6200TC, but the system was slow as all get-out! When I went to Windows Update to get the latest patches and add-ons, after four hours it wasn't even half done (I eventually gave up on it, because I don't have that kind of time). It wouldn't recognize one of my network cards, and even the NICs that worked kept dropping my shared internet feed to Ubuntu 8.04.

The kicker, though, was my sound card. The only reason I still even run Windows is because I need it for audio work. Well, Vista Ultimate 64-bit doesn't adequately support my Audigy LS.

What crap.

 

[VenomXTF]

You're using 1GB of RAM, of which 256MB is reserved for video memory. Do you seriously expect Vista to run fast? 2GB is recommended for XP, 4GB for Vista.

I have no idea how you are having problems with your NICs. I have yet to see any standard NIC that did not work with Vista. What brand are they?

Windows Update taking so long has nothing to do with Windows Update but with your internet connection. I've never had a problem with updates being slow.

Sound card issues, blame Creative. Pretty much every other sound card works fine.

 

[hurtstotalktoyou]

Originally posted by: VenomXTFYou're using 1GB of RAM, of which 256MB is reserved for video memory. Do you seriously expect Vista to run fast? 2GB is recommended for XP, 4GB for Vista.

It's not a matter of expectation, but of usefulness. I don't care why Vista is slow. The fact remains, it is slow.

I have no idea how you are having problems with your NICs. I have yet to see any standard NIC that did not work with Vista. What brand are they?

The one that didn't work was a 3Com 3C905C-TX. The connection dropping seems to have been a network configuration issue, not a driver/hardware issue.

Windows Update taking so long has nothing to do with Windows Update but with your internet connection. I've never had a problem with updates being slow.

I download at about 1.0 MB/s in XP. The Vista update wizard didn't tell me at what speed it was working, but 1.0 MB/s seems about right given that I was apparently installing over 6 GB of update files. Also, the internet connection probably didn't cause about a third of those updates to fail to install the first time, requiring me to reboot and start again.

When I re-installed Windows XP, the entire process took about one hour, including downloading and installing updates.

Sound card issues, blame Creative. Pretty much every other sound card works fine.

As with the speed issue, I'm not really concerned about pointing the finger. I'm not looking to blame anyone. I want my system to work. If Vista won't do, then it won't do.

 

[Cybercraig]

Vista should run fine on 2gb. One gb is stretching it. Plus that video card's got no horsepower at all for Vista. I'm running Vista 64 now because 32 just plain f*cking quit working. No sound (Media player stopped), and a slug of other conflicts that kept popping up. So far so good on 64. Yea, it may be pretty but it sure ain't fast!

 

[ViRGE]

1GB is too little for Vista 32, and especially for Vista 64. Vista 64 has higher memory requirements because you have to keep a bunch of 32bit libraries loaded for the WoW64 subsystem, which means 1GB doesn't go as far on Vista 64.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou
As with the speed issue, I'm not really concerned about pointing the finger. I'm not looking to blame anyone. I want my system to work. If Vista won't do, then it won't do.

Then you have nobody to blame but yourself.

Vista works great with properly supported hardware. You just want your system to magically work when you ignore known compatibility problems?

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou
I'm also pretty disgusted with Vista. I run a Core 2 Duo E6300 @ 2.8 GHz, with 1GB RAM and a 64MB GeForce 6200TC, but the system was slow as all get-out! When I went to Windows Update to get the latest patches and add-ons, after four hours it wasn't even half done (I eventually gave up on it, because I don't have that kind of time). It wouldn't recognize one of my network cards, and even the NICs that worked kept dropping my shared internet feed to Ubuntu 8.04.

The kicker, though, was my sound card. The only reason I still even run Windows is because I need it for audio work. Well, Vista Ultimate 64-bit doesn't adequately support my Audigy LS.

What crap.

How much is more ram?..a lot cheaper then what you paid for Vista,I would not even run XP with 1GB,as to sound card support that again is down to Creative to release proper driver/software,my Audigy 4 works fine in Vista x64,good enough for gaming which is all I really care about.

End of the day if you are not happy with software/driver support for your Audigy LS then go over to the competition.

One thing I've learned since my old DOS days is having more ram for any OS is always a good thing,it solves a lot of problems and makes the OS in question a better user experience.

As with the speed issue, I'm not really concerned about pointing the finger. I'm not looking to blame anyone. I want my system to work. If Vista won't do, then it won't do.

You are expecting too much especially with only 1GB,end of the day Vista is an OS,not a complete driver /software bank for every piece of hardware out there,if you was that concerned you should of done some research on software/hardware before going over to Vista.

Vista will work with good performance etc.. you just need to know what it needs just like any other OS,you'll be amazed at what more ram does to Vista.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
For the Hauppauge drivers, that is most certainly a problem on their end. Hauppauge isn't known for producing great drivers, even their newer products released after Vista weren't 64bit safe. They have made several beta driver releases that I know about this year with 4GB fixes for various products. I am told this driver may fix your issues, but since I don't have a PVR-150 I can't test it myself.

And George is right about driver signing, it really is a good thing. If it could be disabled on a whim by the user, then it would be trivial for malware to disable it and embed itself as a driver/rootkit.

Heh I can attest to Hauppauge's driver quality. First one of their packages failed to recognize my card. And now when I browse a folder with movies it throws a driver error and kills explorer in WinXP.

 

[ChronoReverse]

Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou

Originally posted by: VenomXTFYou're using 1GB of RAM, of which 256MB is reserved for video memory. Do you seriously expect Vista to run fast? 2GB is recommended for XP, 4GB for Vista.

It's not a matter of expectation, but of usefulness. I don't care why Vista is slow. The fact remains, it is slow.

Man, XP is such a piece of junk. I mean, it can't even run on my 386 with 1MB of RAM where MSDOS 6.22 ran like a speed demon. To make it even worse, my far faster 486 with 4MB can't run it either. What's with these useless new operating systems that don't even support my hardware?

 

[wiin]

I am disgusted with Vista too because it works perfectly. No problems with drives or getting addresses. I am just so plain bored with nutting to complain about that I am compelled to, like you, rant about how bad it is cuz, like I said, it just works.

Originally posted by: archcommus
Well I just built the system in my sig and of course that requires Vista 64-bit to be able to use all 4 GB of memory. Although my daily usage is mostly just fine, I am very disappointed with stupid little things with this OS so far.

First, on installation it told me drivers were missing for my PATA DVD drive. Okay, then please tell me Vista how you booted off the disc and read all the setup files in the first place? Retarded. And how could it possibly not have simple IDE controller drivers? Turned out the fix ended up being to set the DVD driver to SLAVE even though it's the only device on the cable. This is not just something I made up, it was a documented solution on at least two other forums and worked for me as well. Absolutely ridiculous to expect someone to come up with something like that, and this was not a problem with 32-bit Vista.

Next, it completely failed to be able to get a proper IP address from the DHCP server of my router. The router is only 3 years old. After hours of research the problem appeared to be that Vista sets the broadcast flag in a DHCP request packet to 1, and older routers do not support this. Instead of just flipping the 1 to a 0 if the initial request fails to see if that works, instead Vista just decides to report an "unidentified network" and give up trying to get an IP address. This flag had to be forced to 0 manually in the registry, and EVEN after that it still fails to get an IP address and reports unidentified network about half the time. This problem may be for both 32 and 64-bit versions.

Third, there is no way to disable driver signature enforcement if you want to actually have all the latest updates without rebooting and choosing that option from the boot menu. I really don't see why this couldn't be something the user could choose if he/she wants to load an untrusted driver. This means to run PeerGuardian I must specifically remove at least a half dozen updates and run some commands at a prompt, or reboot and choose the special mode before every time I want to launch it.

And finally, Hauppauge PVR-150 drivers do not work in 64-bit with 4 GB or more of memory. I'm not sure if this is Hauppauge's fault or Microsoft's fault, they both blame each other, but after this OS has been out for nearly a year and a half, it's really just something that shouldn't exist and adds to my frustration.

I can't even use 64-bit IE due to my add-ons being 32-bit only. Really I'm not gaining anything from 64-bit except for being able to use all 4 GB of my memory.

 

[RebateMonger]

Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou
When I went to Windows Update to get the latest patches and add-ons, after four hours it wasn't even half done (I eventually gave up on it, because I don't have that kind of time)

Usually, when I see that in an XP box, there's something wrong with the hard drive/cabling/controller.

 

[RebateMonger]

My two TV tuners are one reason I'm not going to run Vista x64 any time soon. I refuse to throw away perfectly-functional hardware. I'll wait a year and take another look at x64.

 

[GundamSonicZeroX]

Originally posted by: archcommus
I can't even use 64-bit IE due to my add-ons being 32-bit only. Really I'm not gaining anything from 64-bit except for being able to use all 4 GB of my memory.

I had that same problem with Firefox in Ubuntu Linux. The Flash plugin really pissed me off since it was broken. Had to search the Ubuntu forums for a custom install script to install the 32-bit Flash.

 

[archcommus]

Originally posted by: George P Burdell

Originally posted by: archcommus
Third, there is no way to disable driver signature enforcement if you want to actually have all the latest updates without rebooting and choosing that option from the boot menu. I really don't see why this couldn't be something the user could choose if he/she wants to load an untrusted driver. This means to run PeerGuardian I must specifically remove at least a half dozen updates and run some commands at a prompt, or reboot and choose the special mode before every time I want to launch it.

Annoying as this may be, it helps keep Vista stable by guarding against rogue third-party drivers.

In any case, I run PeerGuardian on Vista x64 without any problems. I had to enable testing mode and sign the PeerGuardian drivers myself. Search for a post by SynthDude2001 explaining this in detail.

Thanks for the advice! I agree it's a good security feature and would be nice to not have it be disabled all the time to have the peace of mind that no unsigned drivers are being loaded without my knowledge. I will attempt to sign the PG2 drivers myself. Quick question, do you have to be in that test mode all the time? Or only when doing the signing?

Yeah I suppose the Hauppauge thing is their fault, it sucks because they make good products and their site is well organized and easy to find what you need. They're just very slow with updates and are sometimes buggy, as Genx87 can attest to. Like I said it's just another thing to add to my frustration. I need a new tuner. Really cool to hear about Leadtek being on top of their game, I have used one of their analog cards in another computer of mine for years and it's been great. I would consider one of their new cards but is it okay to get a digital only tuner? I imagine the unencrypted digital selection over Comcast is slim.

 

[Mem]

Really cool to hear about Leadtek being on top of their game,I have used one of their analog cards in another computer of mine for years and it's been great. I would consider one of their new cards but is it okay to get a digital only tuner? I imagine the unencrypted digital selection over Comcast is slim

It depends on what you exactly want,Leadtek do a full range of both analogue and digital Vista compatible cards here ,easy to check driver availability too even for Vista x64.

See what I mean about their great Vista driver support 😉.

 

[EarthwormJim]

Most of your complaints are not Microsoft's fault.

The driver signing while annoying, is a step in the right direction. Also there is a way to sign your own drivers for your own computer if you so wanted.

 

[hurtstotalktoyou]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Then you have nobody to blame but yourself.

As I said, I don't care who is to blame (though I am a bit curious how you've concluded it's my fault Vista won't run properly on my PC). I'm deeply unsatisfied with Vista, because it does not work on my system--and what does work is extremely slow.

Vista works great with properly supported hardware. You just want your system to magically work when you ignore known compatibility problems?

The only potential problem I knew about was the 1GB RAM. However, that was more than the 512MB requirement, so I thought I'd give it a shot. I wouldn't mind it being a little slower than XP, after all, if only it were excellent in other ways.

I most certainly did not know about the problem with my Audigy LS. Neither Microsoft nor Creative makes any mention of compatibility issues. Also, the 3Com NIC failure was quite a surprise--although, to be fair, I never had the chance to look for a solution (getting it working wasn't a priority since I had another NIC to substitute for it).

As I said in my first post, here, the Audigy LS was really the central problem. If that worked, I'd spend more time trying to workaround the other problems. But it didn't--not properly--and that was singularly unacceptable.

 

[hurtstotalktoyou]

Originally posted by: Mem

How much is more ram?..a lot cheaper then what you paid for Vista,I would not even run XP with 1GB,as to sound card support that again is down to Creative to release proper driver/software,my Audigy 4 works fine in Vista x64,good enough for gaming which is all I really care about.

End of the day if you are not happy with software/driver support for your Audigy LS then go over to the competition.

One thing I've learned since my old DOS days is having more ram for any OS is always a good thing,it solves a lot of problems and makes the OS in question a better user experience.

I got Vista Ultimate free from the Windows Feedback Program. I only need one copy--for the PC I will eventually build for my father--but they sent me two. So, I figured I'd load up the second copy on my own PC, upgrading from XP Home Edition.

When I said "what crap," I didn't mean that Vista is crap. I'll still be installing it on my Dad's future PC, which won't have any archaic hardware such as the Audigy LS, and which will have 2GB RAM. What I'm disgusted with is the experience--I was excited, and then the rug was pulled out from under me when it turned out my hardware wasn't supported--as well as the marketing--only one of the issues I had was easily foreseeable.

Anyway, it's no biggie. I still have XP, and despite cries to the contrary, it runs great with 1GB RAM. It even ran fine on my Athlon XP 1800+ bedroom system, back when it only had 256MB RAM.

You are expecting too much especially with only 1GB,end of the day Vista is an OS,not a complete driver /software bank for every piece of hardware out there,if you was that concerned you should of done some research on software/hardware before going over to Vista.

Well, you must understand that Vista sort of just fell into my lap. I could have done research, true, but why bother when I can just try it out, and discover precisely what if any problems I'd have to deal with?

Vista will work with good performance etc.. you just need to know what it needs just like any other OS,you'll be amazed at what more ram does to Vista.

I'm sure it will. Like I said in other posts, though, the biggest problem was my Audigy LS. That was really out of left field, and killed the whole endeavor.

 

[Tempered81]

vista is horrible and many people prefer xp over it. Don't bother wasting breath arguing with the vista fans here. Mem in particular will set you straight: vista is king.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
vista is horrible and many people prefer xp over it. Don't bother wasting breath arguing with the vista fans here. Mem in particular will set you straight: vista is king.

There are some legitimate issues with drivers for certain peripherals in Vista, particularly x64.

Like in the case of the OP.

But stating Vista is horrible is beyond naive.

I've been happily using the "horrible" Vista for a year & a half now as my main OS, & as far as i'm concerned, XP is horrible :roll:

See how silly that sounds?

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
vista is horrible and many people prefer xp over it. Don't bother wasting breath arguing with the vista fans here. Mem in particular will set you straight: vista is king.

Like always you are never really post anything useful or constructive,I said Vista will give good performance providing he has enough ram etc...as to Vista being King,yes its better then XP IMHO but you forget my favourite OS of all time which I have stated more then once ie DOS (good old days) however thats another story for another time.

I was trying to help the guy rather then do you what you have done and make silly comments like above.

I wish some XP users would grow up and act mature when posting but then I guess that's asking for too much.

I'm sure it will. Like I said in other posts, though, the biggest problem was my Audigy LS. That was really out of left field, and killed the whole endeavor.

Go over to the Creative forums and you'll see a lot of complaints by Creative owners,a lot of users have even moved over to the competition or using onboard sound,end of the day a company is only as good as their support for their products and sadly Creative Labs have always lacked full customer service and support for their products.