Exactly. In all these threads like this everyone is very quick to say it's Windows ME Redux and other exaggerated statements, but no one has actually given any reasons as to why they think Vista isn't a good OS. I find that most people running the OS are very happy with it, while there are some who have run it, but it wasn't compatible with the things they wanted to do with their computer. This isn't something new with new OSes, especially when there is a new code base.
-
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.
WTG Vista!
Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Exactly. In all these threads like this everyone is very quick to say it's Windows ME Redux and other exaggerated statements, but no one has actually given any reasons as to why they think Vista isn't a good OS. I find that most people running the OS are very happy with it, while there are some who have run it, but it wasn't compatible with the things they wanted to do with their computer. This isn't something new with new OSes, especially when there is a new code base.
Chadder007
Diamond Member
Ive honestly had more trouble out of Linux distros than Ive had out of Vista so far.
Number1
Diamond Member
I purchased Vista Home Premium 32 the day it came out. Over all its slower and less reliable then XP for me. Here a screen shot of what I got after an update a few weeks ago:
Blue Screen of Death!
I occasionaly experiences complete PC shutdown when using Photoshop Element 5. I still cant program my Logitech remote with Vista.
My advise, stick with XP for mission critical operations.
Blue Screen of Death!
I occasionaly experiences complete PC shutdown when using Photoshop Element 5. I still cant program my Logitech remote with Vista.
My advise, stick with XP for mission critical operations.
PrinceofWands
Lifer
Other than the standard reasons (don't need it, expensive, still buggy, lack of driver support/hardware compatibility, etc) this particular version is simply too bloated (size and resources), the new licensing sucks, UAC is crap, the DRM changes are disgusting, seems to be an excess of communication going on, system req's are very high (for any kind of performance anyway), and so on. Like I said, I'm sure they'll solve the bugs and compatibility within a year or so, but the overall direction of the OS is too draconian for me. XP and/or 2k3 do everything I need windows os's to do (which isn't much) and FreeBSD/Ubuntu take care of everything that really matters for me.
I've tried out a few systems with Vista and saw nothing special or especially useful. The few people I know who have systems running it have experienced constant troubles (no or bad drivers, apps not running, blue screens, etc), which have been even more impacting for them since I'm usually their tech support and I won't touch them any more. So between the theory stuff above and the practical experience I have nothing but negative impressions. I've heard it works awesome for some people, and fills some kind of role that they find very useful, and that's fine. I'm very used to having different tastes in pretty much everything anyway.
You are certianly entitled to your opinion so I won't argue and try to 'convert' you 🙂 I would like to make a few points you might want to consider.
First, as slammed as UAC has gotten, it's well implemented and is going to slow down the spread of malware on Vista systems. It's noisy as heck when you first setup your system (if you self install, people buying 'boxes' from Dell probably won't notice). After that it does it's job, I get probably on average 1 or 2 prompts a day (and these are for things it does make sense for me to be prompted on). As one who's very closely tied to the security community, the feature does make sense and is making a difference (however, it's certainly not perfect, as some of our own research shows).
Second, as far as system specs. I'd suggest you compare Windows XP vs Windows Vista on equivlant hardware at the time of release. The actual dollar cost of a Windows Vista machine is actually less than a Windows XP one (based on the costs when released, obviously not the costs now).
I can't comment much on DRM other than to presume you're refering the hidef display issue (which is the same on XP, MAC, Linux, etc, MS was just one of the first to implement it).
My last thought is that Vista64 is the first real consumer OS that will allow people to utilize >3gig of memory on their boxes. I honestly think that will be the biggest driver of V64 over the next year.
As for issue, I honestly don't see much difference now from the XP release when people where clamoring for certain drivers as well. It's nice to see so many 64bit drivers coming out at the same time as the 32.
Again, not trying to argue with you, I respect your opinion. I only ask at some point you at least consider the data above.
Cheers,
Bill
PrinceofWands
Lifer
Even allowing for the few things that you point out, there's still no plus in switching for me. It does nothing that I can't already do cheaper, with existing hardware and software, with no learning curve, with fewer bugs/crashes, across more systems (compatibility-wise), and so forth. There was an AMAZING set of reasons to upgrade to XP from 98se...those two systems are night and day different. There are no such differences between XP and Vista except in the negative direction (to me).
XP was actually an upgrade though at least for people coming from 98/ME, it offered much better stability among many other things from the NT family. ME was a crappy update to 98 that was like 98 but less stable and added a bunch of worthless junk. Which is exactly what Vista seems to be to XP.
Its true the jump from 98/ME was revolutionary while the 2k to xp (or xp to vista) jump is evolutionary. However I disagree that it is less stable (crash data seems to show the opposite, it appears more stable than XP at release). It's hard to discuss the 'worthless junk' argument, some people love (for example) bit locker while others really don't care.
Lastly, the biggest leap (which I really really feel is overlooked) is that this OS will drive the consumer market to 4gig and above. Right now on XP people are generally limited to about 3 gig usable, this is finally broken and a HUGE improvement for the industry.
ah, but we're not comparing XP to release with Vista, we're comparing XP now to Vista. that is the most relevant period. XP has become very stable recently, so going to an operating system that isn't as stable is a step back. what does the crash data say for that comparison?
as for drivers, XP had plenty of them because 2K drivers worked just fine (if 2K was NT 5, XP was NT 5.1).
Boo Boo
Golden Member
so many people brainwashed by big ole bill. its to bad they can't think on their own and are the puppets of the heirarchy.
there are the few who try and control what people know when the truth is out so don't let them
Vista is overpriced junk that should be flushed. dont allow them to cloud your saneness
there are the few who try and control what people know when the truth is out so don't let them
Vista is overpriced junk that should be flushed. dont allow them to cloud your saneness
Shawn
Lifer
Vista has been more stable for me than the latest XP. It is also faster. The new media center is enough to keep me from ever going back to XP Pro or even MCE.
edit: You are right about the drivers. It took forever for manufactures to make drivers for 2k. However by the time XP came out all the 2k drivers worked (with the exception of wireless drivers) so the transition was much easier. Vista needs new drivers for most things which is going to take a while. The ONLY problems I've seen with Vista have been DRIVER RELATED.
dmcowen674
No Lifer
If show me the same PC set up side by side proof of this I would shut up forever.
Except for the vastly improved task scheduling for multicore, improved memory managment, improved network stack, DX10, improved UAC using hardware DEP, improved UI, and all with a faster boot time.
Lets not forget bitlocker, games for windows.... i can keep going.
Not everyone "wants" or "needs" to spend their money on vista, but to compare it to ME is pretty asinine.
destrekor
Lifer
sadly we as consumers have no power and if you want DX10 you are forced to upgrade. You can do it once Service Pack 1 is available and fixes the things wrong, but I'll be happy to upgrade for the sole reason of DX10. That and I can get the Ultimate version from OSU as Student Media... sometime soon, whenever it gets here.
I never bashed XP but I see no need for Vista other than to sell more hardware and bring digital rights management to our pc's.
There's an old expression... don't fix what ain't broke. Why Microsoft chose this "fix", abandoning a perfectly fine O/S and trying to force us all to use this bloated new one, is beyond me.
There's an old expression... don't fix what ain't broke. Why Microsoft chose this "fix", abandoning a perfectly fine O/S and trying to force us all to use this bloated new one, is beyond me.
Shawn
Lifer
Well I don't have any hard numbers but Superfetch seems to do it's job. Compared to XP, applications seem to open much faster and the computer just feels more responsive as a whole.
The only time Vista is slower is when it is run on a computer that doesn't have enough ram or does not have proper drivers. I put Vista on my dad's Celeron 2.4GHz computer w/ 1GB of ram and there weren't any Vista drivers for the onboard video so I had to use XP drivers. They worked but Vista definitely felt slow until I disabled all the visual effects. After that it was just as fast as XP. I'm sure if VIA releases some real Vista drivers for the video card it'll work just fine.
Games may run slower but the only recent game I've played was C&C 3. I never played it in XP so I don't have anything to compare it to but I've played it in Vista and it ran fine. I'm not one of those people who counts FPS though. Each driver release from ATI has improved performance in Vista. It won't be too long before game performance is identical to XP. Remember how people used to dual boot 98SE and XP because 98 had better gaming performance?
Like I have said it all has to do with the drivers. I have a new Core 2 Duo system that I built last month and it has drivers for everything so it runs great.
I'm not sure where you got the impression that Vista isn't stable, it is. The biggest issue is with certain classes of drivers who's model has changed, for example sound. But most of the primary cards are available now. Video was the other area and many people where upset that Nvidia wasn't ready, but they've caught up now.
Skipping drivers where the models have changed (video, sound, network), XP drivers generally work as well in Vista as 2k drivers did in XP (XP also changed the driver model for some drivers and changed power management signfigantly).
64bit Vista is still lagging in some drivers, but thats no different that XP64 (generally the situation is MUCH better than xp6 since that is orphaned and we are seeing most people develop 32 and 64 bit drivers now [since they have to for HCL certification]).
Because the base platform was 8 years old and didn't scale to the current and next breed of hardware. Do yo really want our industry to just say 'well, computers are fast enough and easy to use enough, we are done?' By that logic MS should close up shop because when Vista is adopted (or XP by your example) no one should uprgade again.
SoundTheSurrender
Diamond Member
I don't see what's so awesome about superfetch. Great, now when you exit a game you're hard drive has to thrash just to load what the OS thinks you're going to use. Have fun on a laptop.
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
-
-
