Windows Vista: Should I wait for Windows 7 or move on to Vista now?
- 1/16/09 4:11 PM
Some wait even longer
by Nandro2 - 1/18/09 8:57 AM In reply to: Should I wait for Wiindows & or move on to Vista now? by Larry W. YoungI worked at NASA for several years doing tech support and when I left there 4 years ago they were still using windows 95 for even critical work with windows, although all the truly important mission based work was all done with Solaris. In any case, their reason when I asked why Win 95 was that every glitch and flaw had either been patched or was well documented. For servers they used good old NT SP4. In any case, having tried Win 7 beta, it does seem better made than Vista, but my standing question is if Win 7 takes off and does very well, how much will they dedicate to supporting and patching Vista post Win 7 release?
Microsoft OS.
by haroldbldn - 3/14/09 12:44 PM In reply to: Should I wait for Wiindows & or move on to Vista now? by Larry W. YoungPersonaly I loath Vista and would be far happier to stay with XP Pro.
what really annoys me is the attitude of Microsoft,
You will use what operating system we state
where as the maxim gone that the customer comes first
I believe all Operating systems should be supported if required.
I recentely purchased a Dell Laptop
and because of having Vista installed it lies unusable as I cannot get to grips with the OS
Xp is not an option as it cannot be installed.
£800.00p. completely wasted it justs stands to one side while I still
use my Acer which was the reason for the initial upgrade. 
Unfortunately as a silver surfer age becomes a barrier to understand
new technology therefore my reluctance to change.
Haroldbld.
Change can be difficult but is sometimes rewarding
by cnetmessageman - 3/14/09 4:18 PM In reply to: Microsoft OS. by haroldbldnMember Haroldbld, I do empathize with your resistance to change but there are significant benefits despite Vista's "annoyances", particularly to Surfers. The escalating profusion of internet based malware will make you very thankful that M$ built Vista from the ground up with Security as its primary focus. Win 7 may be more "user-friendly" but the expert consensus is that the integrity of UAC has been compromised in order to achieve that goal.
More than likely, your current machine is infected even though you may not be aware of it. For starters, I suggest that you run a scanner such as SuperAntiSpyware (SAS). This program is free and one of the best of the new breed of scanners that I have tested. I also suggest checking out some of the advice offered by Eric S. on his blob entitled, "Invincible Windows".
Provided that your hardware is adequate to run Vista [2GB RAM, Dual Core CPU 2.0Ghz +, preferrably a dedicated Video Card such as an NVIDIA 8600GT with 256MB] then you should obtain excellent performance - provided that the OS and Hardware have been updated with the current patches (as in at least up to the end of February 2009). The performance difference can be huge since most issues can be tagged to poorly written device drives that vendors were slow to update.
You may also find that after you get over the initial shock of the change (and struggled to figure out how to relate the old to the new), many features are actually better written in Vista and many unnecessary steps have been reduced or eliminated. The greatest barrier is that we have become accustomed to doing things so inefficiently.
Though I would not have stated this a few months ago, choosing XP Pro over Vista only really makes sense if:
(1) You have many older programs or hardware (such as printers) that you want to continue using.
(2) You want to spend as little $$$ as possible on Hardware and are not willing or desirous of spending enough $$$ to acquire the minimum suggested above.
(3) Extremely resistant to change.
Hopefully you will consider dusting off the Dell and at least downloading and installing all the latest patches and then take it for another spin. Especially after you have done some malware scans on your Acer XP Pro machine, you may come to view the Vista machine more favourably.
How
by clay58 - 3/14/09 9:21 PM In reply to: Microsoft OS. by haroldbldnHow in the world can you loath Vista when you have not even used it. I am a silver surfer as you say. I am 62 and I love Vista. I hated XP and all the problems it had for the first 6 years after it's release. It was only after the release of SP2 that XP became a stable OS. The vast majority of people who had problems with Vista were of three categories.
The first category were the people who foolishly upgraded an XP computer to Vista. Very, very, few of these computers could run Vista very well. Vista needs Ram and plenty of it, and also need sufficent hardware to run the OS, Most of these computers should have never been upgraded in the first place.
The second category were people who bought Vista and had old software or hardware that would not run on Vista. The very same thing happened when Microsoft came out with 2000 and then XP. Old out of date software and hardware not running on a new OS, should be a no brainer. Technology moves forward and if you do not move with it, you are left behind. I heard the very same thing then as I hear now. My software or my printer will not work with Vista. Well boo, hoo. Get a new printer, they are dirt cheap and way better than that old one you now have anyway. Software will, in most instances work, and if not, get over it. You cannot expect Microsoft to support this old software forever.
The third category are those who do not like change. I suspect this is the category you fall into. I can tell you without hesitation that Vista is not that different from XP, that you cannot use it from day one with very little effort. If you can use XP you can use Vista. And beyond that Vista is much safer than XP. With sufficient Ram Vista is just as fast if not faster. So what is the downside to Vista. It needs lots of Ram, that is the downside. Ram is dirt cheap so what is the big deal. Buy a Vista computer with at least 2 GB of Ram and don't look back.
You missed two categories
by waytron - 3/15/09 2:55 AM In reply to: How by clay58The fourth category are those that confuse Windows with Office and do not like Office 2007 and blame it on Vista.
The fifth category are those that hate Vista because they simply heard it from someone in categories 1 thru 4 and have never tried it themselves.
.... and how long will you wait?
by Old Dog New Tricks - 1/10/09 2:52 PM In reply to: Should I wait for Windows 7 or move on to Vista now? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Hi Jerome,
You are clearly someone who believes in taking advice and then thinking long and hard before deciding - so my advice to you is phrased as a question.
What do you think you should do? The advice you have been given is varied, but can be summarised as:
1 - Buy a vista PC now
2 - Buy a vista PC after July & benefit from a free upgrade to W7
3 - Buy an XP PC
4 - Buy an alternative (Mac, Linux)
However, please consider how you use & what you use your PC for. If you are comfortable with taking on a new OS on a frequent basis, then you should consider Vista now, upgrade to W7 & then to the next one (W8?). If you prefer to stay with what you know (as long as it works all the time, then possibly you should take an XP machine (MS will support it until 2014), at which time you can make your next choice.
I certainly agree with those who state that any new OS will have bugs, and it is wiser to wait until the 1st service pack has been released. However, consider also whether to buy the "best PC" you can afford with lots of Ram, disc storage etc and pêrhaps find that you didn't need to or whether to buy something that is "good enough" (hopefully a lot cheaper), and simply do the same thing each time a new OS is released (always waiting until after the 1st service pack, of course).
In your position, I offer my 2 cents worth by saying I would:-
1 - Buy an external hard disc and do very regular back-ups (since you never know when your current machine is going to fail). This applies equally to any machine of course.
2 - Buy a "cheap" 32 bit machine with Vista but after July 2009.
3 - Review how you feel about Vista around July 2010, when W7 should be around, and hopefully so will be the 1st service pack.
If, at this stage, you are happy with Vista & your machine - stay with them. If you are happy with your machine but want to upgrade to W7, then do so. Please remember that technology is always moving forwards and upwards & so if you decide to buy a new machine in 2010, give consideration to a 64 bit machine.
Hope this helps.
Peter
XP is the last version of Windows
by bblackmoor - 1/16/09 7:48 PM In reply to: .... and how long will you wait? by Old Dog New TricksWindows XP is the last version of Windows anyone should consider buying.
If you absolutely must use Microsoft Windows (and few people fit this description), then buy Windows XP Professional.
For everyone else, install Linux: either Ubuntu or Fedora.
xp is the last version of Windows?
by BenShami - 1/16/09 11:26 PM In reply to: XP is the last version of Windows by bblackmoorThe suggestion was to get windows xp professional or opt to linux. I've never used linux and don't really see the utility in using it for gaming applications... which is generally what I use my pc for... I have a pc with xp professional sp/3, a Windows Vista sp/1, and a machine with windows 98 SE for my quasi dos stuff. Windows can be a little sketchy on the first iteration of the release so I generally wait a bit say 6 months to a year before I pick up the new version, however, as a system builder I usually mount an oem version in a new build that I design for that os, using parts that are relatively new tech. My Windows 7 build will most likely be an i7 core build(quad core with qpi of 4.8 gt/s). The i7 core just went retail in December and I believe will make a good choice for a new build .. and the year and a half wait will give the Windows 7 and new tech a short time to shake out some of the bugs before I have to build it.
Windows XP is nice, but it won't be practical forever
by BigGuns149 - 1/16/09 11:28 PM In reply to: XP is the last version of Windows by bblackmoorWhile I am all for the open source movement the reality is that a lot of people for a myriad of reasons won't be able to completely move away from Windows. They may use Mozilla or Opera for all their web browsing and OpenOffice as their MS Office replacement, but there may be one or more applications that either run poorly or not at all through Wine or Crossover. They should still continue to use various cross platform open source applications where possible, but a clean break to Linux just isn't feasible. While there are millions who could fairly easily make such a clean break I think that the percentage that still need Windows for some reason is a bit greatly than you imply.
In addition, if one stays on the Microsoft bandwagon one has to be aware that Windows XP enters extended support on April 14th of this year. Once it hits extended support Microsoft only releases patches for issues that they deem critical. For seemingly arbitrary reasons Microsoft has sometimes deemed one issue critical on the current release, but not critical on an older version so that they don't have to release a patch. Since Windows is a closed source OS you are pretty much at the mercy of Microsoft whims upon whether they want to keep supporting it. At least within a business environment I wouldn't consider XP a viable OS once XP enters its' extended support phase. Unless one has a compelling reason to not use Vista (eg. they are running an application that doesn't run on Vista and is either rather expensive or is in-house and would therefore be expensive to update) I think it would be best to move onto Vista. As long as you are on the Microsoft upgrade path you will face forced upgrades that will cost you plenty of money. Short of figuring out a way towards an open source solution you don't have much of an alternative.
Furthermore, for a lot of consumers XP Pro like the Business version of Vista provides features that most users will never use assuming that they even understand their purpose (eg. Domain Based networking).
Big Guns. Just curious. Why do you say "they should"?
by jedeco - 1/18/09 7:38 PM In reply to: Windows XP is nice, but it won't be practical forever by BigGuns149You say you are all for open source, that's cool, but you go on to say the only reason holding you back is the lack of certain apps you need that run on windows. You also say that if people can get open source working via WINE or other means they should go ahead. <br><br>
This is just my opinion, but I am staying with Windows because I just like it better. I think I am the only person left in the whole world. I feel lonely. 
<br>
I'm not sure why people are nowadays saying you "should" move to open source. Why aren't people saying you should try Vista and see what you think before considering any other option? <br><br>
I'm a proud capitalist that believe it's perfectly fine to charge for software because like all other products, it helps keep the circle of life in free enterprise working like it's supposed to. I'm not convinced that a massive move to open source won't cause a huge hit on the U.S. economy and the world economy and a huge loss of jobs.
<br> There would be new jobs created, but far fewer than now exist in the windows ecosystem. I think Windows grew so large due to circumstances and not so much they were really predatory monopolists. there was no competition on the x86 platform, which Judge Jackson need to narrow the monopoly charge to, for them to even fit a monopoly status. I don't like it when Judges define new areas of law like that from the bench. Apple was dismissed as non viable alternative, which was not true, so the powerPC machines like Apple and SUN's workstations were not counted as competitors, when they were. <br>
It was IBM that was the cause of the phenomenon that is Microsoft and I don't hold any grudges against them for it. It was simply an unpresedented occurance in history, not that MS had a way, even as a tiny company, to beat back all comers with illegal tactics. Even DR-DOS that contended with MS-DOS was doing well and poised to compete heavily (it's true MS had code that would prevent MS apps from running on any other OS, but they never released it in their RTM and final releases. It was at that time Novell bought Digital Research and made some huge blunders that gave the entire OS world to itself basically. Novell had other plans.
<br>
Oh well, enough of that. I just am loving Vista, the UI is great and my machine handles Vista Ultimate x64 w/o breaking a sweat for around 1200.00 back in Feb. 2008. I am very happy with it and it should run Win7 no problem.
The question Vista or 7..
by cfraser07 - 1/17/09 7:45 AM In reply to: XP is the last version of Windows by bblackmoorWhile vista is now much more stable than it was upon release and 7 is a new and not yet proven beta release I would go with the vista after July if your able to. 1) it gives you the option to upgrade if you wish to try the new windows 7 when it's released but also gives you the ability to go back to vista with your recovery disks should all else fail. I run XP on all my machines at home including an AMD 4600+ duel core and while i am open to looking at other operating systems to play with I haven't yet gone the Vista/7 route.
Not everyone can easily use Linux
by GinnyF - 1/18/09 1:11 PM In reply to: XP is the last version of Windows by bblackmoorA person who has kept his computer for 7 years, using windows 2000, is not going to be compatible with Linux. My daughter followed a computer knowledgeable friend's advice, and bought a computer without the windows operating system (after her computer with Vista died following a transformer fire on a pole near her house.) It had Linux.
BAD idea. She was paralyzed. She did not know how to do anything. Fortunately her friend also had a copy of Windows XP from before his upgrade, and gave it to her. He was amazed. Everyone knows Linux is so much better than Windows!
Not true for most of us who think POP is something you drink. We want the OS to be transparent.
Linux
by Nandro2 - 1/18/09 4:37 PM In reply to: Not everyone can easily use Linux by GinnyFMy mother uses Linux and she knows squat about computers. I put Ubuntu on her machine and as far as I know the people tied mostly to MS are the ones that need special apps. As long as she can start her browser, do her mail and get pictures and such all she thinks is the Start menu changed. For all she knows it could be the new MS OS in her eyes.
Don't use Linux!
by StephenB54 - 1/18/09 4:07 PM In reply to: XP is the last version of Windows by bblackmoorUse Linux! You've got to be joking.
I am trying to lean enough Linux because I have to for a particular installation.(Ubuntu, supposily the friendliest one!)
What a kludgy joke! You are forced to use command line to do anything important and then with rediculous cryptic commands and parameters.
Even the GUI is really plain and underpowered.
Basically until you can do everything a normal/power user requires in a fully functional GUI Linux is a waste of time for all but the geeky types.
Even Apple recognised this so they created their own GUI to hide the Linux nightmare below.
Get Vista or wait for W7
by tux_stein - 1/19/09 6:48 AM In reply to: XP is the last version of Windows by bblackmoorI'm using XP Pro. and I've used both Ubuntu and Fedora light. It's a sharp learning curve, but short at best. In my opinion, I would do neither, unless you really need a Ws. O.S. I agree with B.Blackmoor. Get a version of Linux and learn how to use it. You won't be sorry. It's time that Microsoft, learned how to meet the needs of its users, rather than the other way around. Shop with your feet, or in this case shop with your O.S.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
