Whats wrong with vista?

[Lexodus]

Really, part of the problem is laziness on the part of the user (and on the part of Microsoft: be honest, vista was absolute shit when it first came out, which is not a good start). The sheer amount of work that you have to do to get it working as it should is way too much for the average computer user, who just wants to play some games and jack off to badly-made porn. Adding to that problem is the fact that to get around all of this stuff, Vista seems to assume that you are some kind of computer genius. A lot of people are lost on what exactly they have to do to sort out the multitude of problems seemingly inherent to the system (read all of the previous posts for an idea. The themes are pretty constant), and, in the end, most of them will figure that it's just not worth the effort... and, of course, UAC is just fucking stupid. And that's all I have to say about that.
The nice thing about the Mac OSes that I've worked with over the years (I use macs at home, and mostly Windows at college, so I've got a pretty even spread of experience) is that all I need to do is put the disc in, install, and suddenly it all works. I had to help the network manager set up the new computers in my school last (academic) year, and the shit that went into that was just unbelievable.

Also, it was overhyped.

 

[Disaster Button]

Vista is love, I have never, ever had a problem with it. Well except now I can't play Dungeon Keeper 2 anymore.. *sigh*

 

[Disaster Button]

*ignore this, fucked up the posting*

 

[Disaster Button]

TO EVERYONE HERE
Do NOT tell me that XP had the same problems when it was first released. XP was released FIVE FUCKING YEARS AGO. With the progress made it is UN-FUCKING-ACCEPTABLE to release a product after FIVE FUCKING YEARS, rip your FUCKING LIMBS AND TOES for it, and it is unaccpetably FUCKING INCOMPLETE AND FLAWED. So suck it up, and don't try to compare vista with the FIRST version of XP it is FUCKING INSANE to do that.

Lol you're cute. You're wrong, but you're funny

Edit: Sorreh for the tripple post

 

[Ph33nix]

I see alot of vista sucks on forums around the net and its forced me to ask the question, whats wrong with vista?
Things not to include: It takes up a ton of space on the hard drive, It attempts to be over protected but its security sucks.

[HEADING=1]This is the only thing that's wrong with Vista[/HEADING]

that pic is fake obviously so thats just some more hate spweing which is mostly what i have seen fro mthe anti vistaers

i feel retarded now...

Of course it's a fake! That's the point.

The problem is between the keyboard and the chair... what's between the keyboard and the chair? YOU. The user. The stupid user that doesn't know how to use Vista and then bashes it.

 

[Dys]

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.

That is so wrong.

XP Home doesn't support dual processors (As in dual socket workstation motherboards with two actual CPUs). It supports any number of processor cores though, provided they are contained within the same chip package (Well it supports quad cores and there aren't any octo cores yet so whether it scales up that much is moot).

It doesn't now. When vista RC1 was released, XP home (pro had a proper update) did not have proper dualcore processer support, it would recignize that there were two physical cores, however performance was lower than it was on older, single core units. Pretty piss poor.

Yeah, wasn't there a fix for that [http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896256] pretty quick? (When I got my first dual core, before Vista RC1 BTW, there was this fix.)

That was released in december 2006, that's pretty late. I can't remember exactly, but I think it was october-ish when I installed vista SP. Wikipedia says it came out september, so there it is, Apparently it was RC2 that came out in october, I may have confused the two and been using that, I honestly can't remember.

It still goes with my policy of "XP is nowhere near as great as people claim" and that it really wasn't a serious option for new hardware rigs when vista was first seen. They are both fairly dirty systems, and compared to XP at this point in it's life, vista is far more usable with post-release hardware. It never fails to shock me when people buy new, quad core dual 4870 rigs and endevour to install windows XP because 'vista is shit'. It's all relative to your hardware.

You however, are right about me confusing dual socket with dual core (I read it somewhere at the time), it looks as though dual core support was introduced to both at the same time (on december 19th 2006). My point still stands about XP taking a long time to work properly and smoothly is still relevant though.

 

[TheGhostOfSin]

it takes at least two gigs of ram to run... you can scarcely access the system files... if you get a bug, it takes the best part of twelve hours to repair, because the system keeps telling you you're "not allowed" in those folders...

My old PC ran Vista on less than 512mb of RAM. All bugs I've ever had were fixed by a good ole fashioned reboot that took 10 minutes at most.
System files are easy to access, too easy. I almost deleted some of them 'cause I didn't know what they were at the time...

I could play KOTOR on XP and I can't on Vista,

Quite frankly, it over uses resources, causes my games to run slow, and doesn't allow me to play any games before late 08. That is why I hate it.

Of the 33 games I currently have installed on my PC only four are newer than 07, the only one I had any problems with, C&C Generals, was fixed by 5 seconds of Googling, a 'Copy and Paste', a 'save as' and a second 'Copy and Paste.'

Most people fear change, that's why people hate Vista

 

[Yokai]

I think it's a decent OS. Maybe not as user-friendly as XP, but I've encountered few problems with it. The one thing that really bugs me though is the UAC (User Account Control). Generally you have to verify that YES I REALLY WANT TO RUN THIS PROGRAM twice before it lets you continue. It's an aggravating waste of time, and the most annoying part is that when you turn it off, Windows Security Center counts it as a massive breach in the safety of your system and always nags you to turn it back on. XP did fine without it, so why include it in Vista?

 

[Instant K4rma]

Allow me to answer your question with a question of mine: What isnt wrong with Vista?

 

[Arkzism]

got no issue with vista

 

[JWAN]

I like vista,
only it has a few bugs
and it takes up way too much space
and it was rushed before it was at 100% (my guess 85% complete based on the many,many updates and the seemingly endless "ARE YOU SURE" "DO YOU TRUST" bullshit )

bottom line, they needed to refine it more before they released it especially the 32 bit version (I have 64 and its good/great, my sister has 32 and its bad/crap-on-a-stick)

 

[Billy Hero4Hire]

it arranges things for you.

Is that why my desktop icons want to move back to the top left of my screen when I shut down?
I swear my icons act like that's the holiest of all places. Their "promised land" so to speak.

 

[JWAN]

it takes at least two gigs of ram to run... you can scarcely access the system files... if you get a bug, it takes the best part of twelve hours to repair, because the system keeps telling you you're "not allowed" in those folders...

My old PC ran Vista on less than 512mb of RAM. All bugs I've ever had were fixed by a good ole fashioned reboot that took 10 minutes at most.
System files are easy to access, too easy. I almost deleted some of them 'cause I didn't know what they were at the time...

I could play KOTOR on XP and I can't on Vista,

Quite frankly, it over uses resources, causes my games to run slow, and doesn't allow me to play any games before late 08. That is why I hate it.

Of the 33 games I currently have installed on my PC only four are newer than 07, the only one I had any problems with, C&C Generals, was fixed by 5 seconds of Googling, a 'Copy and Paste', a 'save as' and a second 'Copy and Paste.'

Most people fear change, that's why people hate Vista

I agree with that to a point, I think that XP turned out to be a workhorse, a solid OS for sure. Vista needed to be refined and Microsoft needs to give themselves MORE time than what is necessary to fix potential issues and release it when its well and truly good. In other words they need to find more (over 1,000 people who know what they are doing and the same amount who have no idea)critics and purposely try and screw it up so they know how to make it BFS, (Better, Faster, Stronger.)

I have 64 bit on my laptop and it works ok and theve fixed most of the issues but its still a memory whore and those bugs could have been identified and fixed earlier.

IN CONCLUSION, Vista 64 bit is good, not XP good but good. They could have made it SO much better if they would have delayed the release for 6 months and screwed around with it some more and made it as compatible as possible with older programs and also to refine it to take up less space.

 

[Sightless Wisdom]

If you don't play games on your pc, it's ok. If you do DON'T FUCKING USE IT! I know from experience, I have Vista. I try to play games but it pisses me off to no end, there are popups nonstop for pointless things that I don't give a fuck about. Especially windows updates that aren't necessary. Also Vista has this strange desire to tell you that this computer does not belong to you...I'm the only user on this computer, no profiles other than this one have been made, it's impossible for it not to have Admin status...so why the fuck does it keep telling me I have to "run as administrator" I'm the ONLY FUCKING USER ON HERE! It's the same when you try to access folders that you usually wouldn't "need" to, only worse. Not only does it ask you to run as admin, it then tells you:You don't have permission. What's that about? Who does have permission then? And why can't I do whatever I want with MY computer?

Anyway to end my angry, grammaticlly pathetic rant somewhat coherently: Vista, in my opinion, is a very sad attempt at making a good OS. I'm eagerly awaiting Windows 7 in hopes that Microsoft didn't screw up again.

 

[SomeUnregPunk]

ANGRY ABOUT UAC?

1. Click on the the window button
2. Click in the search field
3. Type without the quotes "msconfig"
4. Press enter
5. In MSCONFIG, browse over to the TOOLS tab.
6. Find "Disable UAC
7. Click on it
8. Reboot system.

Alternative Route

1. Click on the the window button
2. Click on CONTROL PANEL
3. Click on USER ACCOUNTS
4. Click on "Turn user account control on or off"
5. Follow 2 step instructions

If you play games on your computer and not on a console then you should be competent enough to read manuals. If you do not know how to read and understand manuals and help guides by use of search engines, forums, microsoft's website then you should not play games on the computer.

 

[Brnin8]

Everything is wrong with vista. No brainer there. The fact that Microsoft is releasing a new windows version within a year or two confirms it. It's incredibly buggy, leechful and demanding from your hardware. If you need your pc for games, stick with XP vista supports only a limited number of games. SUXZ0R!

[http://photobucket.com/images/vista%20shit]

The real reason that they're declaring the biggest flop since Millennium is because everyone UNCONDITIONALLY HATES IT. Bugs? Not a problem, even less of one after SP1. Gamers don't need to look twice at the mid-end hardware,

AND THE BACKWARDS COMPATIBILTY - FUCKING - WORKS, GODDAMNIT!

I hate it when people hate Vista for problems that aren't there.

Totally agree and if you ask me Apple kick started it all with their slanted Mac vs. PC ads.
(although UAV could have been toned down a notch by default)

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

None of my programs worked with vista. I would rather keep XP than pay for expensive new versions microsoft office, photoshop, after effects, sony vegas, ect. On top of that I don't really see what they upgraded, they just added that useless sidebar thing and made the interface harder to work with.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

What's wrong with Vista? The amount of messageboxes saying "[insert program name here] doesn'r work anymore.", the constant asking for permission for every damn thing (at least you can turn that off), the network seems to keep refreshing, so it goes on and off, too much network security in Vista (You can make a new map on a network disk, but you can't change it's name), the impossibility to access a shared map or printer on a Vista computer with an XP computer,...
Well, at least I haven't had any bluescreens with it.