Aah the joys of Vista

[Buffy]

Have a friend who ran out and bought a copy of Vista on the first day?

 

Wanna play a dirty trick on them?

 

Call them up on the phone and scream real loud: "Delete all files on drive C, Ok!"

 

This is not entirely a joke!

 

Friendly warning to leave speech recognition turned off....

 

"Download and Install Ubuntu over yourself!"

Buffy

[Lancaster]

A friend of mine brought his copy of Vista to school. When I saw him with it, I held my Mac t-shirt over my mouth and told him to stay back. When he looked at me questioningly, I said that I didn't want to catch a virus. I cocked my head inquisitively and asked him if he was feeling okay.

[alexander]

lol thats funny... i am yet to see a box for vista, so i have no idea how i will react yet, i may have to use a combination of a cross with a couple of pens and the t-shirt suggestion that lancaster just threw in... thats good though...

[Qfwfq]

Reuters, Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:03 AM ET

 

Cummins Catherwood, managing director at Rutherford, Brown & Catherwood in Philadelphia said: "We're at 20 million shares in volume already - that's not your grandmother trading"

 

:hihi:

[imaplanck.]

How much of your system resorces does vista take up?

 

 

XP is pretty expensive already(On my system running XP, I sometimes get the feeling that Pong would run slow on the left over resorces).:lol:

 

 

Microsoft product are a JOKE!

[Fatstep]

I have Vista and it basically is the worst OS I have ever used. VB6's compiler does not work for some reason, and some of the programs I make require moe than 10 sockets, so it blocks them, rendering my perfectly working programs worthless.

[Pyrotex]

...Microsoft product are a JOKE!

True. But nobody's laughing. :/

 

I have a new (one year old) HP desktop at home, running XP. Now, on the bright side, it crashes far less than any version of Windows I have ever run. And only slightly more often then the last version of Mac OS that I ran back in 1995.

 

But I turn it on, go for coffee, log in, go take a leak, open Exploder--woops, I meant Explorer, go discuss what's for supper with my wife, come back and click on Hypography.com. Frustrating. If Vista is worse, then For Get It. Ain't no Way. Sayonara Laura. I'll go back to my sliderule, first. :confused:

[Fatstep]

How is your computer so slow? I am running XP Pro, from the time I press the button until the time I have Firefox opened and on its homepage is less than 45 seconds...

 

My computer has over 100 Gb of DVDs and music, I just cannot comprehend how peoples' computers are so slow.

[C1ay]

This says it all....

[alexander]

lol C1ay, that is pretty true too... :)

 

How much of your system resorces does vista take up?

aside from 470 megs of ram upon boot (670 if you are running the shiny interface and with transparency and stuff). It will probably lag on a P4 2.4Ghz proc and dont try running it without at least a 64 meg graphics card as now even solitare requires 3d acceleration... it requires like 6 gigs of HD space...

 

Pyro, you probably can run OS X on your HP desktop... I'd research, my friends are running it on a Dell Lattitude P4 laptop and a P4 OptiPlex Desktop and also an Acer Turion64x2 laptop.

 

My computer has over 100 Gb of DVDs and music, I just cannot comprehend how peoples' computers are so slow.

Firstly i'd keep that to myself, and secondly it has nothing to do with how fast your computer loads. unless you are running less then 256 megs of ram and a lot of programs start up and the FS is really, really fragmented, then it may cause longer load time, but in all reality its how people manage their environment, what they allow to start up, and all that. I've been able to cut people's loading time from over 5 minutes to under one...

[schlik]

Ah, finally someone who agrees with me, I'm fed up with people telling me how great Vista is, while all logical reason tells me how terrible it is. I can't count how many things I've read about the various glitches and other problems. As for "Service Pack 1" being released within of month of the Vista release, that just shows how glitchy it is, besides, tons of problems have appeared since then.

 

Anyone looking to buy Vista, I strongly urge you to reconsider. Most software/games designed for XP won't correctly operate on Vista.

 

Forget about Microsoft buying out the devil, Microsoft IS the devil. :evil: (Anyone who gets that reference, you rule.)

[alexander]

You guys want to hear a great story?

so today at work we got a dell restore dvd of vista and we decided to put it to use on this dell laptop (its like a 1.4 with 512 megs of ram)

 

so no aero glass (and that is the shiny interface addon) it takes up 7 gigs of HD space and 370 megs of ram. Fine its going whatever nobody cares, cpu is being used for no reason in the middle of it just sitting and idling there....

 

So one of our techs has a bright idea of connecting the machine to the internet and getting updates. It immediately flags a copy of vista is not verified to be genuine, but then while it attempts to verify the OS, it turns out that you cant do that with this particular build of vista and we get kicked... joy... so the control panel now opens to a blank screen or just blinks, no properties are available and at reboot you are prompted to either buy vista or enter another license number and try to register and verify it again. You cant even reach your files!

 

Developers, developers, developers, developers. (anyone gets that reference, you youtube. :) )

[Killean]

Hahaha! I just saw this ad on TV. At first I just shook my head with their commercials, but after this one, I think I'm starting to like them.

 

http://images.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/apple-getamac-security_480x376.mov

[Jay-qu]

hehe I like those ad's

 

I actually got to play around with vista yesterday, on a brand new core 2 duo 1.66Ghz with 1Gb of ram, it looks nice, but not as nice as I thought it would. Still feels a lot like XP but you have to get used to the new layout, nearly everything seems to have moved or changed name.. task manager got some upgrades, gives you more info on your system umm speech recognition was funny to play with - I hadnt trained my voice to it, so I cant really say its rubbish at recognising commands

 

All in all, I was fairly un-impressed.

[Neuro]

It is fairly easy to bash a product unreasonably because of personal and philosophical biases that you hold against the creators of said product. I believe that this is what is going on here.

 

Microsoft tactics that promote “the switch”

Microsoft has a few core tactics that it is using to promote the switch from Windows XP to Windows Vista. None of these core tactics are in anyway criminal or holding the world back. None of these tactics are in anyway forcing change on anyone at all. Of them, these are the ones I found most notable:

 

1-To ensure that the next generation of games is playable only on Vista, Microsoft is only making DirectX10 compatible with Vista, which is what Vista installs with by default. This ensures, that if a game developer is to use the latest graphical hardware (Namely the Geforce8800 or the AMD/ATI r600) to make the latest and greatest video games, that they will have to use DirectX10 which means if you are a gamer you will have to be on Vista to enjoy the game.

 

2-To ensure that the next generation of businesses eventually convert to Vista, Microsoft has released Office 2007 which looks great and runs nicely.

 

3-To ensure that all computers will eventually run either a competitor’s operating system or Vista, Microsoft has capped the hardware that Windows XP is capable of utilizing which will eventually force people to use Vista when their PCs are too good for Windows XP.

 

Vista ram usage debunked

Vista will use your ram regardless of how much you have. No one wants to hear that your sidebar is using 300mb of ram because your sidebar is going to use what ever it possibly can in ram so long as you have a lot of free ram and there is nothing more important to bump the sidebar off of the list.

 

But my gamer friend said if you game not to upgrade to vista because lower frame rates and stuff!

Lets look at this, shall we? As times goes on, technology inevitably advances. Back in the 1980s, words like megabyte were considered to represent a large amount of space on a hard drive or in total system ram. In the mid 1990s, we began to see megabytes in mass numbers when it came to RAM. At present, we are in the midst of the first decade in the 21st century: Hard drives are just now beginning to be measured in terabytes and ram is being measured in multiple gigs.

 

With the increase in horsepower and ranch space that fuels PCs as they advance, software becomes hungrier and hungrier of these resources. If you try to run Windows XP on a PC built for Windows 95, you will note that the entire system may come to a halt. Likewise, if you attempt to run Windows Vista and DirectX10 games on a machine built for Windows XP, you will encounter similar results!

 

This means that with each new installment of Windows that there is a new set of standards for system requirements to run the operating system. Windows Vista is more hungry than Windows XP when it comes to your system's resources. Everything you run will run slower on Vista due to the simple fact that Vista uses more of your system, so, do not post your frame rates and ask us, "why are they lower!?".

 

Windows XP was designed to run with a recommended 512mb of ram and an optimal 2gb of ram for gaming. If you disagree with me, try running Battlefield 2142 in Titan Game Mode on a 64 person server with maximum detail if you think windows XP doesn't want 2gb of ram for optimal performance. When converting to windows vista it is important to note, Vista uses more of your base system, so, your system should be proportionately stronger in order to strong the performance dip!

 

Long story short, it is not to upgrade your PC that is slow with XP but it is for the PC you buy next December.

To even run vista reasonably, you will want a minimum of two gigs of ram. If you intend to game on Vista, begin looking at the prices of directx10 video cards (that is, the Geforce 8800 series and the AMD/ATI r600 series) and invest in 6gb of ram.

 

A 64bit processor is going to become the industry standard within this new generation of Windows and as such, Windows Vista ships with both a 32x and 64x install disc. Take advantage of the 64bit version of Vista and invest in either an Intel Core Duo or an AMD 64 Athlon X2 or FX. Combine this with six gigabytes of ram and a DirectX10 enabled video card and you have yourself a machine capable of gaming under vista.

 

Converting your PC that struggled with gaming under Windows XP to vista is going to get you no where! Upgrade your system to play games in vista! End of story!

 

Games don't run in vista!

Lies. If you are going to make a statement like this, back it up with titles. Even gamespy is optimistic about gamers upgrading their PCs and operating systems to vista, for example:

The Final Word

 

So that leaves the big question: is it time to upgrade? Should you switch to Vista? As far as hardware is concerned, this is a perfect time to either overhaul your current PC or build a brand new one. 2007 is poised to be a huge year for the PC, and with games like Supreme Commander, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and C&C 3 already here, there's no reason to hold off on those hardware upgrades any longer.

 

As for Vista, that's another story. Like any major software launch, Vista's going through some growing pains, and it will probably be a few months before all the kinks get worked out. I'm enjoying it so far, but I still have this fear that some random piece of software or hardware might not work with it. In a few months, as DirectX 10 games start to come out, we'll have some compelling reasons to upgrade to Vista, but as it stands, there's no big rush to upgrade right this minute. Start rounding up the hardware now, back up whatever files you need, so when the time comes to upgrade to Vista, you'll be ready

 

Right now?

I'm writing this from the 64 bit version of Vista Home Premium. The horror stories of Vista 64 not allowing unsigned drivers are ghost tales because you can simply disable this feature just as you can disable UAC. My drivers, even the unsigned ones, all work and function perfectly. I can run every piece of software I ran natively in Windows XP and that includes games. Vista is fine.

[Buffy]

Well there are a few "Microsoft haters" around here. But seriously, Vista is a trainwreck.

 

You don't need to be a Linux fanatic to be scared to death by stories like this one on PCMagazine last week.

 

Sure, I'll agree that if you just buy a new clean machine, you're going to be fine. But if you are older than 10, you probably have some stuff you want to keep around. I myself have one system that has remnants of Windows 386 on it ("I'm a professional, do not try anything you are about to see at home") and has been progressively upgraded since then. On XP, just about everything except old DOS software that expects to be able to directly access an ancient BIOS still works. Its not like MS does not know how to do this sort of thing, the problems that are cropping up are a marketing decision to extract the maximum amount of money from users.

 

Now this makes "gamers" and "home users" mad, but quite frankly my dear, we enterprise software development folks don't give a darn. I can tell you from my own customer base that IT shops in the F500 generally are planning "upgrade to Vista" anywhere from 2010 to 2012, based on MS's willingness (actually only due to threats of kneecapping from multi-million dollar accounts) to continue XP support through 2011. You and I won't be able to get XP any more, but I can guarantee you General Motors will. The incompatibilities and inability to run on even hardware purchased in the last 6 months has pretty much eliminated *any* move to Vista for corporate use.

 

And why did they do this? Simple greed and the feeling that they could. They're starting to pay for it big time. This might be equivalent to IBMs last big mainframe launch.

 

I live on Windows for my livelihood. I can quote chapter and verse on its benefits. Unqualified support of Vista is living in fantasy land though. Given what you're using it for, you're probably fine, but there's the other 99% of us out there who are up in arms about it.

 

MSDN Vista SP1 beta hit the inbox today, snore,

Buffy

[Neuro]

Well there are a few "Microsoft haters" around here.

Linux fans defend their operating system as if their identity is derived from it. There is an insane loyalty between a linux devotee and his linux.

 

Likewise, Macintosh users seem to think that they are hip and cool and represent a rebellion within the corporate world. The irony of it is, Apple represents an approach to computing where the company that codes the operating system not only controls the OS, but also controls all of the hardware, software, and peripherals that the user can purchase as well, with exceptions.

 

Microsoft is more successful than Linux at this point in time because it:

A) has funding to massively advertise.

:eek2: has managed deals in which it can get its operating system installed on computers in classrooms and government offices around the world.

C) due to reasons mentioned in (:friday:, has become and will remain the operating system that average home users are most fluent in. Born on Microsoft, die on Microsoft. Establishing a foothold in this market among home users is an establishment that lasts for life.

E) because it is the current and future standard operating system, it has more money, has more customers, and is in a self perpetuating state of dominance. Being in this position perpetuates this position.

 

But seriously, Vista is a trainwreck.

Disagreed. It is the next installment of Microsoft Windows, in my opinion. It brings with it, stability, functionality, a new interface, the ability to run your previous applications and games, and the ability to run applications and hardware of the future. It is an improvement off of XP in much the same way that XP was an improvement off of a fully updated version of Windows 98se.

 

Microsoft did work hard to deliver a product that offered at least something new. It is an improvement off of XP, but not a major one. Who cares? XP was good, wasn’t it?

 

You don't need to be a Linux fanatic to be scared to death by stories like this one on PCMagazine last week.

That is a great story, I just read it. It made me laugh. The whole article builds up this character McCabe as a PC expert and then goes on to show him making a horrible mistake: He downloads vista and installs it from XP without burning the DVD to a disc, preferring to live on the edge and be a dangerous John Wayne and ultimately getting screwed and feeling extremely stupid when he happens to need the disc.

 

If anything, that story shows you how flawlessly smooth the installation of Vista is. You pop in the disc, click install, and it even downloads the latest updates while it installs itself – you don’t see that in XP. The fact that McCabe had a problem and it required he use the disc is irrelevant because every user should burn the disc before installing, McCabe wanted to play John Wayne and ignore this guideline.

 

Such is not a horror story at all, just a story that involves two elements: An operating system that installs nicely, and a f***wit.

 

Sure, I'll agree that if you just buy a new clean machine, you're going to be fine. But if you are older than 10, you probably have some stuff you want to keep around. I myself have one system that has remnants of Windows 386 on it ("I'm a professional, do not try anything you are about to see at home") and has been progressively upgraded since then. On XP, just about everything except old DOS software that expects to be able to directly access an ancient BIOS still works. Its not like MS does not know how to do this sort of thing, the problems that are cropping up are a marketing decision to extract the maximum amount of money from users.

Personally, I am not worried about a corporation trying to make money in a capitalist society.

 

Richard Stallman can say what he likes about it being moral to violate someone’s code, but that is why he is not the more respectable Linus Torvald. The fact is, if you code something for everyone, that is your intent, and that is fine that everyone can use it. However, if you code something and include with it a license that states whoever uses this software must have a legal key and must not replicate the software with intent to distribute – well whoever uses this software must agree to these terms, or, they must use other software. To me, it is as simple as that. Richard Stallman seems to think that it is moral to violate someone’s intentions and enjoy the fruits of their work without paying them.

 

Now this makes "gamers" and "home users" mad, but quite frankly my dear, we enterprise software development folks don't give a darn. I can tell you from my own customer base that IT shops in the F500 generally are planning "upgrade to Vista" anywhere from 2010 to 2012, based on MS's willingness (actually only due to threats of kneecapping from multi-million dollar accounts) to continue XP support through 2011. You and I won't be able to get XP any more, but I can guarantee you General Motors will. The incompatibilities and inability to run on even hardware purchased in the last 6 months has pretty much eliminated *any* move to Vista for corporate use.

Interesting, to say the least. I still see copies of Windows XP on store shelves everywhere at the moment though that is subject to change in due time. I am never going to be fighting for a copy of it one day because I have many backups of my XP discs and I own licenses to multiple copies. Lastly, I know how to use both Mac OS and various distributions of Linux. I am in no desperate situation.

 

Onto my use of Vista, I’ve managed to get Vista 64 bit drivers for all of my hardware and have absolutely no problems with the switch. I, like anyone fluent in computers, burned all of my Vista x32 and Vista x64 drivers to a disc while still in Windows XP before performing the install. When I installed Vista I did such right on top of my installation of Windows XP which retained all of my configuration settings but brought with it one or two initial problems which were driver related and easily fixed via the disc that I burned my Vista drivers to beforehand.

 

In all honesty, I think you are like me. I would guess that you know your computer hardware inside and out and are not intimidated by a new installment of windows, but you are instead intrigued. If your computer is outdated, such as a 32 bit processor of less than 3 ghz, then I would highly recommend you stick with XP until you get some serious hardware upgrades.

 

Vista is meant to run on the PC of tomorrow but arrived a day or two early, that is fine with me because I have the PC of tomorrow.

 

And why did they do this? Simple greed and the feeling that they could. They're starting to pay for it big time. This might be equivalent to IBMs last big mainframe launch.

I generally disagree with these comments entirely. Vista simply isn’t for people in your positions. It demands nothing of users and ships only with PCs that can run it without problems.

 

The problems arise when people running a 1ghz 512mb 32 bit PC install it over their copy of windows 98 and are confused as to why their system bogs down to a halt. These people generally are in the wrong for installing Vista on such a pile of **** and they shouldn’t be using the minimum system requirements as guidelines. Perhaps that is indeed Microsoft’s fault but you can’t claim that they are forcing the upgrade on anybody just by advertising it.

 

I live on Windows for my livelihood. I can quote chapter and verse on its benefits. Unqualified support of Vista is living in fantasy land though. Given what you're using it for, you're probably fine, but there's the other 99% of us out there who are up in arms about it.

Long story short: It is meant for a top of the line PC. Find your drivers before you install.