Whats wrong with vista?
- Thread starter Ph33nix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I hate Vista because the wizards that operate it stole my lemonz >:O
It crashes occasionally but I didn't really have any problems with it
It crashes occasionally but I didn't really have any problems with it
It crashes more often than XP. It's not compatible with many good games which were fine on XP. It handles its RAM poorly, which causes slowdowns when switching between multiple programs running at once. Programs crash more often than they did in XP, and ctrl-alt-delete takes forever to respond; even then, it spends a long time "searching for a solution to the problem" instead of just closing the damn program. Also, it has memory leaks, which means you have to restart your computer regularly to avoid slowdowns from the RAM all being wasted. XP computers can run for months at a time, without restarting or slowing down. Finally, most of these problems result from Vista ripping off OS X, the OS I hated so much I stopped being a Mac user.
I like it, but then I don't have the insane jealousy of the kind of money Microsoft rakes in to hate it because it's Microsoft. It's a bit slower, but that can be countered, it has trouble running older games, but it can be countered, it runs new games, which is harder to counter on older computers.
What is this memory hog business? I know vista needs at least a gig of ram (preferably 2) but it uses the free RAM as cache to store all the program's you use regularly. This greatly improves system performance and is called 'Super Fetch'.
Personally, I quite like vista. The only issue is that it doesn't support all windows XP drivers. So, if you have some hardware made by a manufacturer that went out of business, chances are you're not going to be able to find a vista driver for it. Apart from some driver issues I've had zero problems. I've not experienced the gradual slow in performance I always got with XP either.
Personally, I quite like vista. The only issue is that it doesn't support all windows XP drivers. So, if you have some hardware made by a manufacturer that went out of business, chances are you're not going to be able to find a vista driver for it. Apart from some driver issues I've had zero problems. I've not experienced the gradual slow in performance I always got with XP either.
Yeah, those pre-alpha vista builds I torrented sure have problems! It crashes, it runs slow, it shoos me away when I come near it. It broadcasts my IP to hackers and gives them free access. Servicepacks? Pfft, who uses THOSE!? That's totally not hardcore, man!
Yay DOS! Amirite?
Every time MS releases an OS, everyone boos and hisses and swears to stick to XP, or 2000, or 98, or NT. Mostly because they heard from a friend that read in a magazine that sourced to a website that contained a link to a blog saying that the new MS OS is aweful because his 10 year old pc barely runs it. Or a self-proclaimed expert that installs everything he can put his hands on, be it virus-infested shareware or freeware from developpers that no longer exists, and claims everything runs too slow. Well duh.
Vista may be far from perfect, but it's not the devil incarnated, He Cometh Onto Ye Computer and Destroyeth All.
If it crashes, there's a problem. Could be a driver, could be a piece of software or bad hardware. It happens, it sucks, it doesn't mean that vista is aweful. It does the same as previous OS's, a little more here, a little less there. It's still windows, it's still MS. If it really was that bad, we'd all be working with Linux by now.
Yay DOS! Amirite?
Every time MS releases an OS, everyone boos and hisses and swears to stick to XP, or 2000, or 98, or NT. Mostly because they heard from a friend that read in a magazine that sourced to a website that contained a link to a blog saying that the new MS OS is aweful because his 10 year old pc barely runs it. Or a self-proclaimed expert that installs everything he can put his hands on, be it virus-infested shareware or freeware from developpers that no longer exists, and claims everything runs too slow. Well duh.
Vista may be far from perfect, but it's not the devil incarnated, He Cometh Onto Ye Computer and Destroyeth All.
If it crashes, there's a problem. Could be a driver, could be a piece of software or bad hardware. It happens, it sucks, it doesn't mean that vista is aweful. It does the same as previous OS's, a little more here, a little less there. It's still windows, it's still MS. If it really was that bad, we'd all be working with Linux by now.
This has probably already been mentioned but I wasn't bothered to check.
Compatibility with older games was/is a major problem. I'm not sure as I heard it was fixed with an update.
Another example is my friend who switched to Vista from XP on his laptop. Although I'm not sure about the specifics I can assure you that his laptop was....broken.
Compatibility with older games was/is a major problem. I'm not sure as I heard it was fixed with an update.
Another example is my friend who switched to Vista from XP on his laptop. Although I'm not sure about the specifics I can assure you that his laptop was....broken.
lol it is..Radeonx said:
i have vista premiem.. just because it came with my laptop and im too lazy to change it... ive only had it for less than a week and its ok so far...
will update if it goes to hell
EDIT:it hates it when i download stuff too...
Didn't we just have one of these like, a week ago? just saying...
And now onto vista.
The problem is not that vista is actually terrible, it's just that it's, well... Worse than XP. it uses more RAM, it has more bugs, and the User Account Control is either popping up for every click of your mouse of completely turned off, with no middle ground.
The problem, in short, is that it's a big step backwards. It's technically a functional OS, but why bother using it when XP works better. I'm not saying Vista didn't improve anything, but the things it did improve don't make up for the things it broke.
And now onto vista.
The problem is not that vista is actually terrible, it's just that it's, well... Worse than XP. it uses more RAM, it has more bugs, and the User Account Control is either popping up for every click of your mouse of completely turned off, with no middle ground.
The problem, in short, is that it's a big step backwards. It's technically a functional OS, but why bother using it when XP works better. I'm not saying Vista didn't improve anything, but the things it did improve don't make up for the things it broke.
Actually MS didn't spend enough time on Vista. From what iv'e heard they were using some sorta beta software to develop Vista. After three years of work Vista was broken from using beta software so they needed to start over from scratch. So Vista is a two year rush of an OS and it shows. Thats why W7 is coming out so fast, it is what Vista was supposed to be.robinkom said:
The answer is two fold.Ph33nix said:
1) The User.
2) The person selling to the user.
That's it.
See. Someone else knows ;p.Mr.Tea said:
I've been using Windows since early years of XP and EVERY blue screen I've ever had has been of my own causing.
The fact that their OS even works on most of these shitty builds folks use is astounding to me. It's not to say that Microsoft makes the best product or to lick their sack, I just can't accept that their product is as faulty as folks tell me.
If Windows was that bad, considering how much I mod and tweak my systems, I should have seen it by now.
PS. Windows 7 is de Shiznit. (For those who need their elitist fix I get a boner for Ubuntu as well so calm down)
I dont understand it either myself, Vista runs well on my machine, no freezes or anything, runs smooth etc and when games crash (due to the game not the OS and it happens less than in XP) vista doesnt notice it, the game just dies and u go to desktop, half the time in XP a game crash = restart/system crash.Ph33nix said:
I use Vista and I love it. It was quite crappy when it came out so it got lots of bad publicity but they fixed it and now it is a great OS. In my opinion, it is even better than XP which is outdated for me now. Most people that bash Vista have used it only for a few seconds or not at all and they merely got their opinions from the reviews or friends so they decided to go along with the crowd and bash it. As for Windows 7, im sure it will be great but for those that have Vista I'm not sure if it will be worth to pay a 100$.
I'm one of those edgy, crazy people who bought a computer just before vista came out, and installed RC1. Let me be the first to point out that, on hardware released around the same time as vista, it was far less buggy than the going build of XP (Yes, I mean the RC1, let's not forget that XP home did not support dual core processors). That isn't to say it's fine, but XP is disguisting example of an operating system, especially considering it's built off of NT, so really XP was already several years old on release. It is beyond unacceptable that it still runs like shit and has no workable 64 bit system, but it is straight up disguisting that they held off updating dual core support on the cheaper version of the operating system for so long.Hoxton said:
Most of the hate on vista was purely because people couldn't run it on older systems, and didn't like that microsoft was trying to force them to update. All the bitching about it being a memory hog is unfounded, yes it uses like 500mb of ram on idle, it also uses less when running resource heavy programs, if you have the recommended settings it will run things fine. Do we remember XP needing 256MB of ram to run, back when 256 was the standard memory rate? How is that different from vista wanting 1GB when most computers have that ram to use? The actual system is only terrible until you compare it to other microsoft OSs, but hey, it's cool to hate vista.