Just tell me escapians(I guess that's what people from the escapist are now called) why all the hate on windows Vista? was it because XP was superior in your opinion or do you just hate microsoft?
Windows Vista - Why all the hate?
- Thread starter Josh123914
- Start date
Recommended Videos
because it awas a bloated mess identified by microsoft as "the premiere PC gaming platfom" that was incompatible with a huge number of existing games, and which would prove to be in no way superior to it's predecessor while adding customer confusion to the mix.Josh12345 said:
tl;dr: it was a weak OS marketed wrong.
-m
Pretty much what Matt said, Vista was just wrong on a gaming pc, processors were slowed down, it wouldn't work with lots of games and just generally fu*ked your computer.Matt_LRR said:
Poor initial incompatibility & driver support. Also, it tended to "dumb down" lots of features that XP users were accustomed to have control over, and it has a habit of getting in your way. The search feature is particularly heinous. Also also, poor sales contributed to a public perception that it wasn't good. Untrue: XP was just "good enough", so why pay hundreds for an upgrade you don't need?
Even so, it doesn't deserve its reputation. It is good. For a number of reasons I won't enumerate here, it was easily the best OS Microsoft had delivered up until that point. It was just really awkwardly launched.
Even so, it doesn't deserve its reputation. It is good. For a number of reasons I won't enumerate here, it was easily the best OS Microsoft had delivered up until that point. It was just really awkwardly launched.
Let us not forget that it was littered with all those bugs. It pretty much screwed your computer more often than it ran smoothlyMatt_LRR said:
(We're Escapists, or as I like to say, 'Scapists.)Josh12345 said:
Its really the same issue people have with vanilla Oblivion. Too many bugs. Now factor in that its an OS and not an epic fantasy adventure, and you get Vista's popularity.
That, and everyone keeps mispronouncing it, "Visa," like its a credit card.
Also, there was a quite a jump in the tech required to get Vista running smoothly, higher than the average PC that was being sold at the time.
![[Kira Must Die]](https://eg-forums-escapist-data-bucket.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/68/68539.jpg?1620622912){kind=avatar}
I have a Vista.
Works fine for me.
Maybe because I don't really care about what type of computer I'm using and I don't play PC games.
Works fine for me.
Maybe because I don't really care about what type of computer I'm using and I don't play PC games.
OK, as a Vista user, I'll make a list -
It's unstable (quite a few crashes, only exceeded in instability by 98 and ME)
It's buggy
It's frequently incompatible with software
The user interface, while pretty, can often get in the way of someone who knows their way around a computer
It has ridiculously controlling security settings
It has a retarded partitioning system
It seriously hogs your performance (out of 4gb RAM it uses 1.5Gb)
And a plethora of other issues that I have had to deal with. The hate is perfectly logical and reasoned.
It's unstable (quite a few crashes, only exceeded in instability by 98 and ME)
It's buggy
It's frequently incompatible with software
The user interface, while pretty, can often get in the way of someone who knows their way around a computer
It has ridiculously controlling security settings
It has a retarded partitioning system
It seriously hogs your performance (out of 4gb RAM it uses 1.5Gb)
And a plethora of other issues that I have had to deal with. The hate is perfectly logical and reasoned.
It became a horrid, bloated thing.Josh12345 said:
XP was considered too large and unwieldy, requiring 64 megs of RAM to run, and had over 30 million lines of code.
Vista, however, shot it in the face and buried it in a shallow grave. Vista requires 700 megs of RAM just to idle, and currently has over 64 million lines of code. 64 million lines that could contain various glitches, back doors, and the ever fun Blue Screen of Death.
The more lines of code, the more chance it has an error, glitches, and dies in a puddle of its own piss. More security holes that require patching. More compatibility issues.
Windows Vista tried to make itself more user-friendly, but didn't want to hand over the controls. It thought you were a small child trying to download a Trojan virus suite every time you went to run anything. I know being asked if I'm sure I want to run something five times before I can actually run the program gets under my skin.
Vista could have been a good thing. But it became too large and over-complex to survive. We strove for more, and we got heartache. Vista is considered one of the largest Windows fail since Windows ME. *shudders* So much crashing...
It takes a lot of RAM, other than that I happily used it for a year before I switched to 7. Also it doesn't compera with XP compatibility but i didn't use any software that giave me problems.
Remembering the initial launch of XP and previous windows releases, Vista was par for the course. But I never really had problems with it, I heard a lot of horror stories that I've been unable to reproduce in my own settings (perhaps its a lot to do with shitty hardware being released with most major PC's that aren't homebrewed).
The switch in architecture was hell on some programmers, also didn't initially allow for cross O/S compatibility. Mostly these problems were from people who wanted to run 10+ year old software on a new machine. Also the change in the GUI was too much for some users to handle and thus some declared it to be "shitty" or "incompatible" when it really was user error.
It wasn't the best release Microsoft has had, but it wasn't bad, just got a bad rep from people who already hated MS anyway.
However, Windows 7 is much more stable in the long run. I don't use linux or unix for many reasons, most of which have to do with the fact that most of the people I do work for don't even have a clue on how to run those Operating systems and thus I need no experience with them. And personally I just don't like the way they're set up, I don't find them easy to install or run on an "out of the box" system especially with new hardware. But thats me.
The switch in architecture was hell on some programmers, also didn't initially allow for cross O/S compatibility. Mostly these problems were from people who wanted to run 10+ year old software on a new machine. Also the change in the GUI was too much for some users to handle and thus some declared it to be "shitty" or "incompatible" when it really was user error.
It wasn't the best release Microsoft has had, but it wasn't bad, just got a bad rep from people who already hated MS anyway.
However, Windows 7 is much more stable in the long run. I don't use linux or unix for many reasons, most of which have to do with the fact that most of the people I do work for don't even have a clue on how to run those Operating systems and thus I need no experience with them. And personally I just don't like the way they're set up, I don't find them easy to install or run on an "out of the box" system especially with new hardware. But thats me.
sorry were you implying I was a clone? Because I doubt genetic engineering has came far enough to clone 12,345 versions of a random forum user.Josh_v2.0 said:
It hit the memory HARD. And not because it was supposed to. It was just very slopply handling data.
Windows 7 was much more solid. And as a result didn't make your computer chug like a 1980's box computer.
Vista was perfectly managable if you had a Terabyte of space and 8gigs of RAM my friend who needs a good punch tells me however.
Windows 7 was much more solid. And as a result didn't make your computer chug like a 1980's box computer.
Vista was perfectly managable if you had a Terabyte of space and 8gigs of RAM my friend who needs a good punch tells me however.
Massive compatibility issues, bugs, resource hogging to the point where it wouldn't even run on something like a netbook, and way too much trying to copy Apple---news flash, Microsoft, if I wanted an OS that looked pretty and couldn't play games, I'd buy a Mac!
Vista : 7 :: ME : XP. Attempted improvement fails miserably, MS figures it out and fixes it before they lose too much market share. I expect Windows 8 (whatever they call it) to suck and Windows 9 to be awesome, lather, rinse, repeat.
Vista : 7 :: ME : XP. Attempted improvement fails miserably, MS figures it out and fixes it before they lose too much market share. I expect Windows 8 (whatever they call it) to suck and Windows 9 to be awesome, lather, rinse, repeat.