Windows 7 takes it all right now but before i had vista no problems at all with it except for excessive security. Any time i would try to download or run something it would ask first and make sure if it was ok to run the program
Whats wrong with vista?
- Thread starter Ph33nix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Vista takes up more of your computer's resources, that's very true. A computer running XP will usually run faster than that same computer running Vista.Hoxton said:
However, if you've actually looked at Windows 7, you'd know that its very similar to Vista. In fact, Microsoft is touting it as a "more focused, incremental upgrade" which is intended to cut back on the RAM Vista hogs, among others. Its certainly nothing alike the quantum leap Microsoft made from XP to Vista, or even from 2000 to XP.
And as for games, there's never been a single game I've had a problem with. If it's an older game, such as System Shock, I'll run it on DOSBox. If it's a game in that grey area between about 1995 and 2001 and it has problems, I've easily been able to find a fix on the internet somewhere.
I wouldn't classify myself as a "Vista fanboy", as you've branded others above. It's just another operating system, after all. But its nowhere near the catastrophe that some people make it out to be. All it is is simply a change.
Cause that doesn't make you look like the so-called troll. Obviously you're a bit frustrated but for pete's sake don't tear your hair out over it! Just a computer dudeGeorge Palmer said:
Vista features a number of versions, eight. Of which the consumer is only interested in possibly five, realistically two. Which one of those two can be chosen with the simple question of "can my computer run the fancy effects". Also, Windows 7 has the *exact same versions* Vista does!
Vista had some serious startup trouble due to customers confusion over 32bit/64bit, and the seriously mis-managed rollout of the new drivers. Windows 7 won't have the same problems, seeing as under the hood it uses a similar structure to Vista.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Microsoft fanboy, not by a long shot. But I really do not get all this Vista hate. It was a significant change, and that obviously brings issues. Which have been adressed in updates, you'll notice that the most significant thing about Windows 7 is the GUI, yes there are performance upgrades, but they aren't a reason for upgrading.
I like Vista. People who say it sucks are either Apple fans or people who haven't used Vista (in my experience. Please don't flame me).
No problems with my Vista.
Rarely crashes (I had hardware conflictions that caused my crashes last time, eventually burned out the motherboard), it's reliable enough for what I want to do and it's pretty fast. The security's been pretty good too - because of a srew-up with my anti-virus I'm not really surfing with more than the basic/router firewalls (daft I know, but I can't fix it).
Mind you, all I do is surf the internet (on FireFox because I really don't like Internet Explorer), listen to music, play games, store images, watch DVDs and occasionally write some word document/excel spreadsheet. It's pretty much perfect for all of that, so I've never seen a problem with it.
Rarely crashes (I had hardware conflictions that caused my crashes last time, eventually burned out the motherboard), it's reliable enough for what I want to do and it's pretty fast. The security's been pretty good too - because of a srew-up with my anti-virus I'm not really surfing with more than the basic/router firewalls (daft I know, but I can't fix it).
Mind you, all I do is surf the internet (on FireFox because I really don't like Internet Explorer), listen to music, play games, store images, watch DVDs and occasionally write some word document/excel spreadsheet. It's pretty much perfect for all of that, so I've never seen a problem with it.
It's a massive unholy system leech. Take a look at any game made after Vista and tell me what you see in the system requirements. Vista pretty much always needs an extra 512MB-1GB of RAM. Almost everything just naturally runs better on... well, pretty much anything but Vista.
Vista has been working better for me on my machine than running XP... I am yet to find a game that doesnt work (And im not using patches or fixes to get them to work) the only reason for all the bad hype is because people cant be bothered to learn and adapt to change... not leaving us with a good future...
I have vista on my newest laptop which Iv had for about 6 months now. The only problems Iv had with it are that it once forgot it had a keyboard (easily rectified by the reset button) and the fact its Blu-ray capacity makes me spend more money on dvds than I probably ought to.
Neither of these problems are vista related.
IMO the problem stems from people using vista on systems meant for xp when it first came out. Me and my friend used to have the same old dell inspiron laptops, he had vista and I had xp. His was slow and buggy and 'leechful' and mine was fine.
Now we both have new laptops both easily capable of running vista, but he switched back to xp and I had the newest version of vista. One bad experience with vista and he spouts all the same bull that Hoxton is, insisting that xp is the better system. In the last 6 months he's had to send his amazing xp system back to the makers twice for repairs while my "Buggy, leechful, daily crashing" vista system doesnt even complain if i accidentally unplug the mains with the battery out.
Neither of these problems are vista related.
IMO the problem stems from people using vista on systems meant for xp when it first came out. Me and my friend used to have the same old dell inspiron laptops, he had vista and I had xp. His was slow and buggy and 'leechful' and mine was fine.
Now we both have new laptops both easily capable of running vista, but he switched back to xp and I had the newest version of vista. One bad experience with vista and he spouts all the same bull that Hoxton is, insisting that xp is the better system. In the last 6 months he's had to send his amazing xp system back to the makers twice for repairs while my "Buggy, leechful, daily crashing" vista system doesnt even complain if i accidentally unplug the mains with the battery out.
Vista works better on high-end PCs, than lower end PCs.
I had Windows XP, and had a lot more crashes than Vista (vista, since I've had it for 2 years, has only crashed once). Another thing, with XP I got thousands of spyware and viruses on sites I visited...and yeah, those um, "fun" sites are usually loaded with them. With Vista, I visit pretty much the same sites...and only got a virus once, when I opened up an email from my grandma...heh. I then got norton antivirus, and still haven't got a virus since my last one I got from the email. With XP I probably would have tons by now, seeing the shady sites I go to.
I definitely like Vista a lot more. Oh and, my dad owns a computer repair business...and out of all his jobs, none of them have had Vista that has had problems. All of his work so far has been for windows XP or older versions. Now I probably jinxed it
I had Windows XP, and had a lot more crashes than Vista (vista, since I've had it for 2 years, has only crashed once). Another thing, with XP I got thousands of spyware and viruses on sites I visited...and yeah, those um, "fun" sites are usually loaded with them. With Vista, I visit pretty much the same sites...and only got a virus once, when I opened up an email from my grandma...heh. I then got norton antivirus, and still haven't got a virus since my last one I got from the email. With XP I probably would have tons by now, seeing the shady sites I go to.
I definitely like Vista a lot more. Oh and, my dad owns a computer repair business...and out of all his jobs, none of them have had Vista that has had problems. All of his work so far has been for windows XP or older versions. Now I probably jinxed it
Vista is the "New Coke" of Operating Systems. It tastes like Mac OSX and those people that don't like OSX either are demanding their "real" Windows back.
Personally, I used Vista a couple times on a friend's computer and didn't really care for it. It is quite bloated and demanding of system resources. My current machine would cough up a lung if I tried to put Vista on it so, for now, I'm sticking with XP Pro.
After all this time, I have noticed the increasing reports of people having trouble running their old XP-based Software on Vista and I don't doubt their claims, even 64-bit XP is really picky about what 32-bit apps it'll support.
With all the bugs and hurdles Vista has had to overcome, my view has generally been objective. To me, it seemed as if Microsoft spent too much time working on Vista, allowing the X{ user-base to explode to gigantic proportions. In effect, the library of software for XP had built up over all those years to the point of "be-all-end-all" acceptance by PC owners.
Visually, it just looks like Vista was trying to play catch-up to OSX, which it really didn't need to do at all. The scrolling 3-D windows function to switch between programs is very akin to Mac Expose. The real difference to me based on my experience is, OSX needs it because it has no real taskbar. Vista doesn't need it because it HAS a taskbar... but it has it because they feel the need to attract the less-computer-capable with bright shiny things. Along with the gadgets and Finder imitation and so forth... in the end, it just bogged it down and made it less efficient.
XP will always be the perfect OS for me until either they release a new Windows that can justify itself to me... or AmigaOS 4.0 finally gets finished.
Personally, I used Vista a couple times on a friend's computer and didn't really care for it. It is quite bloated and demanding of system resources. My current machine would cough up a lung if I tried to put Vista on it so, for now, I'm sticking with XP Pro.
After all this time, I have noticed the increasing reports of people having trouble running their old XP-based Software on Vista and I don't doubt their claims, even 64-bit XP is really picky about what 32-bit apps it'll support.
With all the bugs and hurdles Vista has had to overcome, my view has generally been objective. To me, it seemed as if Microsoft spent too much time working on Vista, allowing the X{ user-base to explode to gigantic proportions. In effect, the library of software for XP had built up over all those years to the point of "be-all-end-all" acceptance by PC owners.
Visually, it just looks like Vista was trying to play catch-up to OSX, which it really didn't need to do at all. The scrolling 3-D windows function to switch between programs is very akin to Mac Expose. The real difference to me based on my experience is, OSX needs it because it has no real taskbar. Vista doesn't need it because it HAS a taskbar... but it has it because they feel the need to attract the less-computer-capable with bright shiny things. Along with the gadgets and Finder imitation and so forth... in the end, it just bogged it down and made it less efficient.
XP will always be the perfect OS for me until either they release a new Windows that can justify itself to me... or AmigaOS 4.0 finally gets finished.
Personally I think Vista is just fine. I mean I'm using that right now and I don't find anything wrong. I mean I can get a tad annoying at time. (such that workdocuments are too advanced for the computers in my school) But at the end of they day I like it. It works fine for me
Heh.
I've never used vista, but then, I don't see the point - I haven't purchased a new computer, and XP works fine on my existing one.
A friend of mine did complain about the interface, but he had specific things he did frequently on his computer (network/internet related stuff mostly), and his complaint?
What took 3 clicks or so to do in XP, now took him about 12 to do in Vista because everything was buried in awkward spots that required navigating through half a dozen menus, where before you could get to it a lot more quickly.
Apparent problems, aside from this?
Bad performance,
Lack of meaningful features over XP.
Stupid DRM implementation that is mostly causes actual users harm (as usual)
But... I can't really comment.
I've done computer repairs in the past, and have to say, when a vista system goes bad, it's a much bigger headache to fix.
I don't really care about vista being good or bad though;
The only reason I even have windows on my computer at all is for games.
I've had (an admittedly irrational) hatred for microsoft since about 1999 or so.
And this came about through the combination of their generally bad products (though they're very good at providing tools to developers, as I've since discovered), and their absolutely atrocious business practices.
I don't care about vista, because I don't care about windows.
I only use it because the alternatives aren't viable for what I spend most of my time doing on a PC.
I've never used vista, but then, I don't see the point - I haven't purchased a new computer, and XP works fine on my existing one.
A friend of mine did complain about the interface, but he had specific things he did frequently on his computer (network/internet related stuff mostly), and his complaint?
What took 3 clicks or so to do in XP, now took him about 12 to do in Vista because everything was buried in awkward spots that required navigating through half a dozen menus, where before you could get to it a lot more quickly.
Apparent problems, aside from this?
Bad performance,
Lack of meaningful features over XP.
Stupid DRM implementation that is mostly causes actual users harm (as usual)
But... I can't really comment.
I've done computer repairs in the past, and have to say, when a vista system goes bad, it's a much bigger headache to fix.
I don't really care about vista being good or bad though;
The only reason I even have windows on my computer at all is for games.
I've had (an admittedly irrational) hatred for microsoft since about 1999 or so.
And this came about through the combination of their generally bad products (though they're very good at providing tools to developers, as I've since discovered), and their absolutely atrocious business practices.
I don't care about vista, because I don't care about windows.
I only use it because the alternatives aren't viable for what I spend most of my time doing on a PC.
Why would you ask our opinion only to restrict it by denying some options? This thread is a joke.Ph33nix said:
That was pretty much my problem with it before as he said he disabled it! Iv'e since gone onto windows 7 and i like it a lot more than vista apart from the fact that i want to do a clean install and i can't work out how to format the hdd with 7.Davey Woo said: