Silent Vista-loving majority?
by chustar - 4/30/08 5:37 PM
Is anyone here part of the silent vista-loving majority? I've used it for close to a year without any problems. Come on people, let's get our voices heard!
ATTENTION: Forums will be in Read Mode only starting today (3/06/2014.) This outage will start at 6 PM Pacific Time and last throughout the weekend for us to perform a major update to our site. We apologize for this inconvenience. Click here for details.
by: chustar April 30, 2008 5:37 PM PDT
0 people like this thread
No issues. Happy with it...
I think the bad press of this product got out of hand. Whether or not a new operating system was needed AT THIS TIME was the real issue. I was very happy with XP however the computer I had would not of made VISTA work correctly.
Since September, I have a new computer that came with VISTA installed. I figured that since I had an original XP version (not oem) if I wasn't happy with what I saw, I would just reformat and put xp on that machine instead. Well, 7 months later and I very happy with VISTA. I never really had an issue with it besides Adobe Acrobat Writer 6 not working on it or Outlook 2002 continuously asking for a password when opening the application for the first time during use. Two minor issues that I fixed anyways since.
The compatibility issue of programs is a lot of BS if you ask me. I can make programs from 95 work on it perfectly. Never had any driver issues that made me rethink this OS. When there was, there was a link to simply update the driver and voila. It's really history repeating itself when XP first came out.
Vista is indeed heavy, but if you think that the next OS will be lighter, you live on another planet. As features get added more memory will be required. Fact from 95 to 98 (cough WinME...now that was crap) to 2000 to XP and now to Vista.
I think that some issues at the beginnig launch gave it bad press by some high profile "tech people" and as usual, people followed that like sheep.
Is Vista made for older machines? NO it is not! Its for computers that have been on the market for the last two years with dual+ processors and gigs of RAM.
Like XP, VISTA will only get better but I hope that MS reconsiders its launching windows for new OS. We are not at the age of Win95 where people lined up for an OS. With a pretty stable XP people are feeling they are getting another OS shoved down their throat when it was not necessary yet. For that, is, IMO why VISTA hasn't lifted in sales as expected and not because of performance.
I have been using vista for quite a while now and am generally happy with it. Some of my older software is not compatible and I'm reluctant to replace them with newer more complicated ones. Updates are frustrating, as generally when I get one something invariably goes wrong with the computer. Usually graphics or printer etc, entailing a sytem restore to get it back where it was before then it normally carries on ok. It is rather noisy though as it's always doing something. Hardly ever crashes unlike XP which was doing it all the time!
What the hell is XPS printing? It tries to save instead of printing and even then fails at that.
Although my current computer would not be able to run Vista properly, I have a roommate that uses Vista, and I have to say that its a great running OS. I think the only complaint that my roommates and I have come across is the fact that the USB does not read the flash drives/externals when plugged in... not sure if thats Vista related...
Overall, I think Vista is great (from what i've seen), I just need a new comp =P
Vista tweaks, just like XP
I got Vista pre-installed on an Everex laptop - upgraded that to Vista Ultimate, and I have since installed Vista Business on an older HP laptop designed for XP. The Everex ran fine, but as it turned out, the factory load was not optimized - I reinstalled it from its master disk, and it runs even better now, this is probably due to the Vista installer updating itself from Microsoft Vista support during load. The new install is some 20% faster!
The HP laptop Vista install amazed me - Vista solved a couple of problems that machine always had. There were no Vista drivers for a number of hardware elements in the HP, but as it turned out the XP drivers, which would not install under Vista, could be manually installed simply by unpacking them onto the HP's hard disk, then from device manager "update" the generic drivers Vista loaded with those XP drivers. Now everything works, including hibernation, which would never work under XP if there was traffic on a port, while somehow the dead laptop battery came back to life - go figure. There are no older XP applications that would not run - in fact, even a couple of 98SE apps run without a hitch, and this includes older communications devices and graphics equipment with XP drivers.
I am not necessarily the silent minority, and have documented some of my exploits in my blog - go to my site and do a search on "Vista" in the search box.
"Is anyone here part of the silent vista-loving majority?"
No, I am not ! Because it is'nt possible !
Sorry, in french :
soft developpee des OS de plus en plus gros (Taller and Taller !)!
C'est une impasse.
c'est contraire tout principe d'ergonomie
Learning to like it.. not in love yet...
Over all, Vista runs noticeable slower on my dual-boot PC than XP Home Edition.. I only installed Vista because I had too.. as a PC-tech. Yet, I am learning to like it.... Microsoft did not do a good job in helping people learn how to transition from XP to Vista in terms of how-to, and where things are... If that had been done clearly in plain, simple language, I think the complaints would be fewer. I also lost a couple of aps, and my old ATI TV Wonder Pro tuner card, but that was an ATI decison not to update the drivers for the tuner card.. Setting up a home network with XP PCs on the network required purchasing a tutorial for 30 bucks.. which taught me what to do, but I shouldn't have had to do that either..
And now I hear that Microsoft is coming out with Windows 7.. I think it's time to just get out of this crazy business.. I can't afford to stay current anymore...
Frank in Tucson
My take on Vista
I find it to be a very good program which is getting better by the day. With it's major thrust in providing security it is the best operating system around for the average person. With SP1 it even got better.
The use of shadow files and restore function have saved me half-a-dozen times from doing a reload. What more can you ask of the program than that?
I must admit that I didn't upgrade to it, though. Instead, I bought an HP Quad desktop, w/3gig Ram. Yeah, I had some issues with some of my periphs but I was planning on replacing them anyway. This just hurried that decision along faster than expected.
I've been in computers for 40+ years and have seen these kinds of problems repeat over-n-over again - mainframes and/or pc's. Vista is not unique in that area, in fact, it's rather common. I remember the nightmare I went through when I upgraded from ME to XP.
Vista does everything I wanted it to do, better, faster, um, not smaller - but, that's understandable since functionality asked for by users were added.
Learned to live with it
Upon getting a Vista machine I had problems and had to send it back to the manufacturer to get it fixed. They put in new hard drives, NICs, speakers, etc. until they were rebuilt, ( did I mention this happened with 2 machines). After 6 months of torture, they upgraded me with more memory (hmmmmm) and faster processors (hmmmm again) just a bigger more powerful machine all around. It was terribly slow right out of the box so I adjusted the Vista settings down to do nothing and now I have a machine that I really like with an OS that is too bloated to use all the bells and whistles. It is aomething like using XP with a sense of more security.
Windows has always been and will always be a Beta OS
I cannot remember a time when Windows was not doing upgrades, reporting back to Windows, fixing something, somewhere at sometime in a never ending succession. Windows has always been a Beta OS and we window users are the unpaid testers who MS could really care less about. MS is interested in big business which has thousands of machines and thousands of licenses to go with them. If big business all went to Mac or Linux, MS would be in a world of trouble. I believe they have to get something right soon or they will continue down that road as they won't be able to hold HP, Compaq, Dell and other PC manufacturer's by the throats for much longer if they don't come up with something better than Vista.
Not only is the essential system in the back nothing super, but the interface, the interface... everything moved from where it had been, nicely hidden or otherwise obscured. In short an interface designed by a drug riddled brain in the last stages of terminal venereal disease - could have done a better job. Congrats Microdolts!
yep i love it, agree with the "territory" comment, just wish they hardware vendors who claim to be vista compliant were telling the truth. a little costly on the hardware upgrades due to incompatibility. But i love the vista
Enjoying it, but not quite silently
I have been enjoying Vista since I purchased my HP Pavilion A6000-N about a year ago. Other than one rather major hiccup, which was as much my fault as it was Vista's (I tried to install OpenSuSE, and killed my Vista installation absolutely dead when I resized the hard drive to make room - I actually had to send the box back to HP to have them reinstall the OS), I have had no major gripes about Vista.
In August, I wrote a review of Vista for the HTMLCenter blog (http://htmlcenter.com/blog/windows-vista-my-review/) and said basically what a lot of people have already said in this topic. It's different from XP, which is why a lot of people have so much trouble accepting it. However, most those same people complained about XP when it came out, and they all wanted to revert back to Win 98 SE (let's not even discuss Windows ME). People simply are not used to the appearance and performance of Vista.
Vista actually includes a lot of great new features, ranging from security (which, a lot of the negative users will tell you is annoying, but it's the cost of adding security to your applications) to performance to aesthetics. All-in-all, I am much more impressed with Vista and its improvements over XP than I ever was with the "improvements" XP made over Win98.
Sure, I've had some minor issues with my hardware, occasionally, but they are never major problems. In the beginning, I had some problems with my display driver constantly resetting, but those seem to have gone away after a series of updates. I have to occasionally reconfigure my audio settings after Vista installs an update, because the built-in Vista sound driver (to which Vista defaults whenever an update is installed) does not work with my sound card, so I have to disable it and set my Realtek driver as the default.
Other than that, the only major complaint I've got about Vista is the issue with the COM Surrogate that's been discussed on countless forums (if you have thumbnails enabled within Windows Explorer, Explorer will probably crash fairly consistently when viewing your media files - but Microsoft blames this on the media codecs and seems to refuse to look into possible soltions).
Of course, if it was possible, I would still prefer to use OpenSuSE for most of my computing needs, but that's just not realistic with the majority of the world using proprietary software and hardware built for Windows. If I have to use a Microsoft OS, I am happy to use Vista.
No complaints, fast system
I built a computer five months ago, installed Vista on it (my first-ever Vista machine), and it's been an absolutely problem-free experience from day one. The computer runs incredibly fast. I don't know if that's because of the enthusiast-grade components I used, or if it's really running better than it would with XP; all I know is that I'm happy with it.
Of course, in order to be truly happy with it, I had to disable UAC, which is the dumbest idea Microsoft's ever had. Once I took care of that, though, it's been running better than any computer I've ever used - and that includes the $4,000 quad-core I just got at work... which runs XP.
VISTA? - No Way Jose!
VISTA?? You've got to be kidding. Been there, done that, several times. Seriously, over the past year plus I've had occasion to purchase a few new 'high end' machines, (Dell, Gateway, HP, Acer, etc.), in the ~$1,000 price range with factory installed versions of VISTA, latest SP. In each case, I ended up returning the machines within the 'trial' period due to 'numerous' compatibility problems, (drivers, etc.), and SUPER SUPER SLOW performance, (as compared to XP) - even with the recommended 4MB of installed RAM. Microgates and company have once again pulled a fast one on us, (Remember ME?), and through their slick ads have managed to dupe a large portion of the public into believing they have a better OS. HA! I just purchased a couple of brand new Lenovo ThinkPad laptop machines with XP Professional installed, (with only 2GB of RAM), and am very pleased. In fact, just yesterday I installed XP SP3 and have noted even faster boot and application performance times than with SP2. As por moi, I'll stay with XP until the post Vista OS, (currently under development), becomes available, and maybe by then M$ will get it right, maybe.
Working Fine For Me
Overall I really like Vista. The best thing is the higher level of security, but of course for the average user this is a pain. It's like learning to wear a seatbelt - at first it's a pain, but then later you realize how dumb it is not to have one.
It takes more horsepower, but that is true for all software. So I throw an extra $100 of memory and things are fine.
I don't experience a huge improvement over XP. To me, it's about the same, but more secure. The visual effects are nice, but don't make that much difference to me.
The Mac OS might be better, but to get a more expensive laptop, with no docking station, which runs fewer applications and has a brain-dead mouse -- I mean how dumb do people want to be?
Our CEO has a Mac, but our tech support department spends about ten times the amount of time supporting him than it spends on anyone else. (If he weren't the CEO, it wouldn't happen.)
If you want to just get on with life and be productive in a more secure environment, Vista works very, very well.
What Was the Point?
I bought a new desktop in the early Vista days when I could've saved a few dollars buying the same hardware with XP. I opted for the new OS on the grounds of keeping my machine relavent longer...which is why I went for the core duo processor and the 2 gigs of RAM. Nothing monster, but enough muscle to keep me happy for a few years. I didn't count on Vista's hunger for resources. The new machine seemed just as pokey as the Pentium 4/XP box I left behind. The interface is prettier, but not much more helpful than XP. The security is better but more annoying. I spent some extra money and sweated the drivers situation (and replaced a printer) to do Vista, but I don't feel I moved forward. I still have the same computing experience I had 6 years ago.
Almost a Vista-lover
Im pretty much of a middling user of things computer, a journalist/writer who needs them for writing, research, correspondence and keeping track of bills and such. Except for Minesweeper, I dont play games on my machine and seldom watch movies or play CDs, though Im almost always listening to one or another internet radio station. Anyway, Im not a techie but Ive had a computer for 15 years or so and have been forced to learn more about the damned things than Ive ever wanted to. Add to that the fact that Im downright stingy and, as a result, have become a user and ardent lover of freeware and open source apps.
Last summer, I got a new laptop for my daughter with Vista already installed and it was okay, just okay. I mean, it looked pretty and all that but it seemed clunky and prone to crash and reluctant to run stuff. Then a month or so ago my beloved main computer (XP Pro/SP2) had a disastrous crash and to get it up and running again it was easier to use Vista/SP1 than not. The differences between the two versions of the Vista OS were major. The latest one feels much more elegant and runs everything easily and well and a few things -- Word 2007 comes immediately to mind work even better than on XP. The only problem I have and it doesnt quite count as major is that a handful of my favorite old programs dont work with it so Ive had to spend an afternoon tracking down replacements. Cest la vie.
Silent and Loving It!
I have used Vista since RC1 and have found it to be every bit the worthy successor to XP. Compatablity issues have been few and far between for me and usually fixable with a little bit of know how and the wonderous Google.
I personally just switched to running only Ubuntu on my own laptop (I like the customization offered by Linux), but I got my wife running vista almost a year ago. She is no where near technology literate and she loves it!
Love that user friendly stuff
I love Vista, if for no other reason than the OS-wide speech recognition.
"Open..." and it opens. Speak an email, and it types. Open Word, start speaking and in 10 minutes I miles ahead of where I can type.
It works with an old HP computer, all the flash disks and the only problem is that the firewall turns itself off when the computer is off. Bummer! Global Finance's Kate
Have used Vista since Beta 2, both 32 and 64bit versions
Just reinstalled my Vista 64 bit desktop OS for the first time since RTM (usually do that periodically) and it's back to Super snappy.
With XP I usually had to reinstall every 6-8 months to get that "new" feeling back, Vista made it almost 18 months. WIN!
Yeah, it's okay.
I've been using it for a couple of months now and it's fine. I've got a new, powerful computer so all the graphics (eye candy) run and look fine. It still isn't as nifty as the Mac's graphic user interface (GUI), but it's a lot sexier than XP. I've had no trouble getting all my peripherals to work because Vista has been out long enough for almost all the manufacturers to come out with updated driver software. Be that as it may, I still run XP on my old laptop and, for the moment at least, I have no intention of converting it to Vista.
I love Vista and I'm keeping it for myself. . . .for now.
I have been The resident IT geek for a department at a major University for the past 8 years now and was here for the great XP migration, which was nothing short of a nightmare for many of my cohorts. Now that Vista is here we are seeing some of the same growing pains - and a few new ones.
Personally I am running two dual boots of Vista and XP (one here and one at home) and for the most part I really have no complaints with the operating system itself. At my office it does everything I ask it to and hasn't missed a beat. The problems we are having here have to do with our GPO structure, with which Vista has a hard time dealing with. As long as I keep them separate from my other GPO groupings, they work great.
The few users I do have that are using it have had almost No complaints about it, either. Security wise it is way ahead of where XP was at this stage of the game and from a IT point of view the new automatic updates work great and really don't rely on the user at all to sit through an install, or delay it, which on my XP systems is most often what happens.
That's not to say that we haven't had our share of problems - at home my 9 year old scanner refuses to work and of course no driver is available - but I saw that coming 3 years ago when they decided not to support XP64-bit. I was ready to pony up and buy a new all-in-one, and should I really expect a 9 year old scanner that I paid $60 for to work with the next 3 OS releases. No. And should I really expect the sound card I paid $26 bucks for 5 years ago to work? No. The new machine I built runs both the 32bit and the 64 bit versions beautifully, and it's nice to see a Motherboard manufacturer (XFX - very nicely done!) really take the time to provide complete driver sets for ALL possible OS, both the 32 and 64 bit.
Funny story - the $5000 scanner we bought 4 months ago works great with XP, Win 2003 and Mac OSX 10.4, but not Leopard - and this is a network scanner too. MS is not the only OS with growing pains. . .
Vista is better than XP
I have a Toshiba S2 laptop (circa 2005) and a Dell Dimension 8100 desktop (circa 2000), neither of which are officially on the Vista compatibility list from either vendor. Regardless, I waited until SP1 was released and then installed it on both systems. Vista is smoother, faster and much more responsive than XP ever was. I can only imagine how great it would be on a new system.
We always repeat this hate-then-love cycle with any new operating system release. History always repeats, in this sense. People love to complain and vent while the positive experiences often go unspoken.
I hate Vista with a passion
But I can't downgrade to xp becausr I have Home edition, I don't think it is right for microsoft to dictate to those who buy computers to have to use vista instead of xp, and they want allow you to revert to xp, is there anyway to get xp pro back?
Yes, And everyone loves to hate on me for it.
I have been using Windows Vista for the past year and a half and I have not yet had any problems with the operating system that I would've deemed a deal breaker for me. So far, I haven't had a blue screen in YEARS and that's a really nice change of pace. I haven't had the MONDO driver problems that the community has shouted out on, and all those various problems everyone's been screaming about. File copying's SLOW, but its not like it can't copy the darn thing and SP1's fixed that... Sorta. And yes games are slower on Vista than on XP, but honestly I don't feel it so much at all.
To talk about this Vista, in the community I find is a bit like talking about some taboo. It automatically gets slammed, even if a person hasn't used it, or even tried it. Vista is not ALL that bad y'know. REALLY, and hating on it just because its the cool thing to do, or just because its too easy to bring the hate to microsoft is just lazy in my opinion. The strange thing is, when one complains EVERYONE hears it, but no one ever effuses about how normal something actually is. Vista does exactly what an operating system should do for me, work normally and not throw too many curveballs for me to intercept, and that really is all I need.
I bought a HP laptop around 2 months before Vista came out. It was supposed to be "Vista capable". Nevertheless when I upgraded many things did not work as expected (and still some are not working). Subsequently, I bought one desktop and one laptop already with Vista. I have not had any problems with Vista in those PCs. I love my desktop it has a Blueray/HD-DVD/DVD drive and a cablecard TV turner that allow me to watch premium channels. Everything works really nice in the Vista environment. Maybe old PCs were not prepared to work with the sophisticated Vista and that was the origin of the multiple complaints when the OS came out.
Changed the furnature around
I have had Vista as a beta tester from the Longhorn days and while I like a great deal of the new features, the ball got dropped on several important issues and others were handed off to the wrong sources. I'm a PC tech by profession and found from my customers that Vista could have been far more acceptable if a few items were handled in a better fashion. The biggest reason Vista got bad ratings is MS basically did the equivalent of changing the furniture and cabinets around in a blind person's house. They put things in different places and changed the names of known items. This made it difficult for those who weren't tech intensive that had spent a lot of time developing their workflow over the years. The look and feel didn't change as drastically during previous transitions between 95, 98, 2000, XP, etc. the workflow was still very similar with those transitions. While Vista is easier for someone that never used a computer before, it is hardest on people that have used windows in the past that are afraid to explore the new playground. MS did the same thing with Office 2007. The other big thing that gave Vista a bad rap was the lack of drivers for older equipment. MS did much better in the past at supporting older peripherals but the majority of customer complaints I got were that they couldnt use the existing printer/multifunction devices. MS didnt update most of the device drivers to work with Vista as they had done in the past like from 98 to XP. They left that duty to peripheral manufacturers who would rather force as many people to buy a new one as possible and had no desire to create a driver for an old product. The problem MS has is that it is Vista who took all the heat for that one. I like the way Vista has consistently healed itself when you would otherwise end up with a blue screen of death from a driver or software conflict. Having used Macs also, Vista has come closer to the look and feel of OS 10.x. Vista is now a new visual experience but it has a pretty high price in overhead. If you install Vista and XP on identical hardware, the XP runs substantially faster even with most of Vistas visuals turned off. I hope MS will learn from this, but somehow they claim they are listening to you but they havent ever heard a word Ive said. I suggested back in 98 that text in error message dialog boxes should be selectable so you dont have to type the whole message when searching for a solution, but it has never been implemented and Im sure Im not the only one to mention it.
Amen to the gripe about non-selectable error message text
The inability to select text in error messages in all of Microsoft's OSs and most of their applications is a real pain.