Windows Vista: Poll: Whats your personal experience with Vista?
- 5/7/08 10:29 PM
I love me Vista
by robellie - 5/8/08 7:52 AM In reply to: No Windoze, ever for me. by SkywoolfI got an HP laptop on Black Friday, before Vista was out. It came with XP installed and a coupon for a free Vista upgrade. I sent for the disk, got it around March. I waited a few days hearing bad stuff about Vista. Then I got the itch, installed Vista, and have not looked back. Vista has been working wonderfully on my laptop. What's all the fuzz about?
I am a microsoft professional and have developed for years
by ggipper - 5/8/08 9:34 AM In reply to: No Windoze, ever for me. by SkywoolfI have had vista for 15 months. My greatest discuss has come from microsoft staff that pretend to protect us from pirates. I purchased my real copy from amazon.com and was almost arrested for installing it. Arrested over the phone that is. Since the microsoft phone harrassment I am no longer a loyal developer.If they did me like that they will do all like that. I do not need insults added to the difficulties that vista has presented to me a developer.
I will not use vista and I will sell it for almost nothing just to get rid of it. I will stick with suse and win-2003 enterprise since they are stable operating systems and I have used 2003 server since early 2003. My records have relied upon the stable 2003 and I will stay there for years until I am super happy with suse-linux.
I did not help develop vista, but maybe I should have, since I do not accept half-done work. Vista would never have hit the streets if I had something to do with it. I would advise all to look beyond the dependence upon one platform and try the great free linux programs. They are absolutely free, but you must google the name of the unix source that you seek for free downloads. Most (.org sites) give the softwares away at ftp sites rather than htm. html sites. Good luck all and have a large hard drive or dvd burner for the linux softwares if you plan on downloading the suse, red-hat or hundreds of linux titles Just go to google and ask for all linux operating titles and then ask for free downloads of that software and watch what happens.
Not fond of Vista at all
by daimonmt - 5/8/08 1:01 AM In reply to: Poll: Whats your personal experience with Vista? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Unfortunately it all comes down to money at the end. Microsoft needed some more billions in their account so along comes Vista, mind you XP is getting old to handle the latest craze of technology with 4GB and more of Ram, high demanding processors and so on, on the other hand Vista should solve these issues, but apparently not, I beleive that Vista was launched early to try and win the race with other OS manufacturers like Max, Linux and so on. I still do not understand why we, the public have to pay so much money in buying these failing OS systems, people, just stick to XP and let Microsoft get the message, on the other hand I have read a post somewhere that by 2010 there will be windows 7 being launched. With all these upgrades one can clearly see it's only for commercial purpouses and not to satisfy the demand on new technology, if it was so, how come most of engineering to PLC programs run better under win 98? It is because keeping things simple works every time. i am tired of Windows XP taking 4gb of hard disk with hidden updated and patches and to use vista I need at least 20GB free! What are we installing here a whole autonomous Artificial Inteligence or a silly OS so that you can read your mail and watch some menus hovering? Mac always had it right with less hardware requirements. Unfortunately they still lack a bit in compatibility also the market is on only one Product which is a Mac brand name. To cut the story short, If Vista failed so much on it's launch like XP there is no way i will upgrade and if I am faced with a hard choice in future, I definetly will look at other OS.
Mac works hard at compatibility but MS does the opposite
by Skywoolf - 5/8/08 1:20 AM In reply to: Not fond of Vista at all by daimonmtApple work very hard to achieve maximum compatiblity but MS works equally hard to create incompatibility with everyone else. Even Java script is crippled on Windoze to make it incompatible with other OSs.
The MS philosophy is to try to force everyone to use Windoze by trying to make the Web and their software incompatible with anything except Windoze.
Hardware Monopoly Compatibility
by vis-vobiscum-sit - 5/8/08 2:25 AM In reply to: Mac works hard at compatibility but MS does the opposite by SkywoolfIf by maximum compatibility you mean being the sole supplier of hardware to Mac users so they can charge exorbitant prices(which they most certainly do)...
I bought a computer 10 months ago that came with Vista. Initially I wasn't too happy about using a new OS, usually I let it sit awhile so they get most of the kinks worked out, but so far I have had absolutely 0 problems with it aside from its annoying tendency to hold your hand through the basics. From what I've heard from other postings on this site and others it seems like a lot of the complaints people have about Vista are either with the earlier versions, or because they were naive enough to believe that their old hardware that barely met the minimum specs would run like lightning. As for Mac & Linux, I've used Linux before and never had any problem with it (I really liked how compact it was with respect to Windows gargantuan code), but I won't touch a OS X with a 20 foot pole until I can get hardware from somewhere other than Apple Computers.
Mac Hardware and Windows hardware is the same
by chappejw - 5/8/08 3:11 AM In reply to: Hardware Monopoly Compatibility by vis-vobiscum-sitMac uses intel hardware. Wireless cards, processors, motherboards, etc. Mac does not make that hardware, Intel does. I believe Macs initial kick off to get people to switch was the fact that they switched to an intel platform so people could compare Windows / Mac side by side and see for themselves, that Mac is faster for one, more secure, and with that in mind has much more value than windows. The difference you are paying for is not just hardware, but operating system. Of course you would pay more for a Mercedes S-class than a Chevy Cobalt.
Intel makes the hardware, Apple sells it
by vis-vobiscum-sit - 5/8/08 2:47 PM In reply to: Mac Hardware and Windows hardware is the same by chappejwIntel hardware yes, but where do you actually buy the hardware from? Intel.com? Assuming you don't want to build a so called "Hackintosh" or don't have the knowledge to do so (you can't use any part you find on Newegg like you can with Linux or Windows), the only place you can get a pre-assembled Mac from is Apple (as opposed to the many places such as hp, dell, gateway, etc. where you can buy a PC). As for the software being a part, OS X is 129.99 & Vista premium is 129.99 (prices from bestbuy.com), so the additional price cannot be attributed to software. It basically comes to a tradeoff, faster OS performance on limited hardware (Mac) or slower OS performance on virtually unlimited hardware (Windows). If you get decent enough hardware as I like doing, the performance difference in the OS becomes elementary anyway. You may prefer the former which is your personal choice, but I like to be able to, if, say, my video card is outdated, go over to Newegg, tigerdirect, etc. and buy an appropriate replacement (PCI, PCI express, etc.) and know it will work without any sort of clever internet hacks. Or say, for some reason I wanted an AMD processor, that wouldn't be a problem either... as long as I don't have a Mac. This is the same reason I stayed away from 64-bit windows, which was having an issue with a lack of drivers at the time I bought. So once again I say: Apple's vertically integrated business model allows it greater compatibility (it controls exactly what its OS can run on) but also allows it an unacceptable control over the price of its hardware which it seems overjoyed to exercise on a consistent basis.
Windows Vista
by hotwheels54 - 5/8/08 4:19 AM In reply to: Hardware Monopoly Compatibility by vis-vobiscum-sitSo Far the only problem I have had is my my old Creative Zen player would not work Vista.However after updating the driver on the device it works fine. Slow down is also not a problem since my my computer is new and designed for use with the system. Otherwise it just takes some getting used to and learning how things work. At first it was A little confusing but now I can operate it as good As I did XP.
VISTA vs. XP
by Bozz5384 - 5/8/08 4:23 AM In reply to: Hardware Monopoly Compatibility by vis-vobiscum-sitI was very excited when Vista first came out, ran the compatability wizard program and everything... My system SHOULD run Vista just fine.
However, before I got around to it -- I had the chance to use some Vista machines.... S-L-O-W, S-L-O-W-W-W ...... The interface looks new/refreshing, but its still S-L-O-W....
Therefore, I haven't changed, and have no intention of changing until:
a. I have to
b. They release SP2, SP3, or whatever it takes to handle these issues
Bozz
Compatibility
by kenoli - 5/8/08 8:56 AM In reply to: Mac works hard at compatibility but MS does the opposite by SkywoolfCouldn't agree more. Mac interfaces with everything. Microsoft simply assumes that people are working in a complete Microsoft environment. If something, hardware or software, happens to be compatible with other systems, great. Otherwise, Mivrosoft couldn't care less. I'm sure that billions of dollars have been spent alone on making web sites compatible with IE. I'm surprised someone hasn't sued Microsoft for that alone, and I can't understand why anyone continues to use IE.
--Kenoli
Windows is a Tool
by davidvh2 - 5/8/08 1:13 AM In reply to: Poll: Whats your personal experience with Vista? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Windows XP is an Operating System & as such, my computer uses it rather well in my opinion, to allow me to use my computer as a tool. My computer is NOT a toy & never will be. I am not impressed with resource hungry software that slows up my use of this tool nor would I take kindly to having to read silly little totally un-required messages & watch fancy art work flowing around all over my screen. Finally I see no point in fixing what aint broke & Vista is just another headache that I just don't need. Whatever improved security measures may be built in, will certainly be overcome by the smart arses that do that type of thing so what's left----of any real use that is?
Blame the decision makers !!!
by trainref - 5/8/08 3:25 AM In reply to: Windows is a Tool by davidvh2I have had the works--Windows 3.1, 95, 98, XP SP2 and now Vista Ultimate-both 32 bit on my laptop and 64 bit on my desktop. I had many problems with XP when it first came out, but BILL'S BOYS corrected them. I always upgrade hardware and software about every three to four years, if you don't stay in touch with the times and changes, your going to be left behind. You have to make adjustments for new software, hardware and what have you, but nobody forces anybody to make the initial change to a new OS. So to anybody that blames Microsoft or the hardware manufacturers, why did you make the change to the new Vista OS, is your XP OS going by the wayside. You people have a choice keep what you got or opt for the new technology. Your present programs will work , but they won't change to match other upcoming tech changes. So if you make decisions towards new software and hardware situations and they don't work for you , I don't think it is right to blame the manufacturers. By the way I am retired and I do not or ever have worked for any computer companies.
Goodluck, it your decision.
Blame the decision makers?
by geofbrewer - 5/12/08 2:39 PM In reply to: Blame the decision makers !!! by trainrefI started on PCs with DOS 3.1. I made the moves up the ladder because my employer kept buying new machines with Win 3.X, Win 95 and so on. I also did some research on my own and found out some of the ideas behind NT. I come from a technical background, so it was natural to want the new toys to play with as my employers spent the bucks. When it came to my personal systems, I didn't have the resources to keep up. One doesn't always choose wisely. I no longer work for the employer with the deep pockets. I keep up as best I can. The push is from the hardware side and the software side, although the software side has a tough time keeping up. We have far more computing power than the average user needs. Just ask Best Buy when the 486 came out. The 386 machines were considered "boat anchors and door stops".
I tried with Vista for 3 Months on , brand new Toshiba, but.
by fschoonbaert - 5/8/08 1:14 AM In reply to: Poll: Whats your personal experience with Vista? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I bought a new Toshiba laptop (R500) with 2GB of memeory in late Janaury 2000 with Windows Vista Business. My thoughts were that after more than 1 year on the market Vista would have shed most of the initial problems and with SP1 imminent things looked good. I was really determined to stick with Vista and have spend a lot of time on making it work. However this weekend I decided to give up and downgrade to WIndows XP and it is unbelievable how much faster and more efficient Windows XP is. It is like my computer has become Turbocharged.
Here are the problems I ahve had with Vista:
1. The 'Indexing' never worked because it enver finished. I could not use the search function in Outlook 2007 and not on the desktop. It always said it wasn't finished. I forced it to restart several times, but with the same result. Finding information quickly is essentail for me as a business user with several years worth of materials stored on my PC.
2. I have a 3G modem with Vodafone data subscription. The modem never worked with Vista. I upgraded the software and that eventually ruined the modem (Costing me 170 Euro). The modem I used specifically said it was (Windows Vista compatible). many other users told me since that there 3G isn't working with Vista.
3. I use this laptop mostly when I travel, but a desktop in the office. I synchronise my files with a 'briefcase' which works fine. It also works in Vista, but very slow. Not just the synchronising, but also opening a file from within the briefcase in an office application. Synchronisation took between 75s and 90 secs typically in Vista(In Windows XP 20 to 25 seconds after downgrading) and opening a file between 10 and 40 seconds (almost instant in Windows XP)
4. Quite a few applications that worked very well on XP are not Vista compatible (Such as Adobe Acrobat 7) and I have spend quite a lot of money to upgrade to newer versions which don't offer me anything extra for my use.
I must admit that Vista has a nice interface and will probably be the future. However tehre is nothing that Vista can do (for me as a business user) that XP can't do.
I would advise anyone that has XP with office 2003, spend your money on getting office 2007 and don't upgrade XP. With office come a lot of teh features that make Vista somewhat interesting (such as indexing and sharper more readable character sets)
better XP
by dodicimarzo - 5/8/08 2:04 AM In reply to: I tried with Vista for 3 Months on , brand new Toshiba, but. by fschoonbaertNo, Bill non doveva farci questa mascalzonata.
Ho due Pc: quello con Xp funziona perfettamente, l'altro con Vista, un problema quotidiano: lento, insicuro, soggetto a improvvisi crash.
XP aveva raggiunto la perfezione; l'imporre a tutti i costi il sistema Vista su tutti i nuovi pc rivela una mentalit da monopolista, da profittatore che, infischiandosene del consumatore, pensa solo alle royalties degli adattati sofware.
Poi va in giro a donare soldi non suoi.
Bravo Bill!
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
