Is vista a Flop?

Forum for anything else which doesn't fit in the above forums. Site feedback, random talk, whatever, are welcome.
Post Reply
Joe S
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: NY

Is vista a Flop?

Post by Joe S » Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:15 pm

Is it me or does vista seem to be a bit of a flop? Considering the time and money MS spent developing it Vista doesn't seem that well received. Business doesn't like it because it needs more powerful and expensive pc's . Hardcore Gamers don't seem to like it because XP is faster. There doesn't seem to be much software developed especially for Vista either. The public in general doesn't seem that excited either compared to earlier releases. I've been thinking about having a new pc built locally I've got new copy of XP Pro SP2.
Joe

User avatar
bober101
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: canadia!

Post by bober101 » Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:24 pm

yes joe, it is. ;)
XP theme source patcher
patches/overwrites ure default xp visual resources

User avatar
Siginet
Site Admin
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:07 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Post by Siginet » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:24 pm

Vista in my opinion is like Windows ME. "Should have never been." Windows ME was just a prettied up version of windows 98SE. Which is the same I think of Vista... a prettied up version of XP. But when they prettied up ME they actually ruined Win98SE. Which is what vista is... a ruined XP. It is only about money in my opinion. Vista is no more than a graphical update to XP which uses twice the resources. I would not reccommend vista to any buisiness environment. For home users who do not do a lot of gaming and want a "Pretty" interface... can use vista. ;) Windows XP is solid... but vista is buggy and almost useless. But Microsoft has made pretty much all the money they can off of xp because it has saturated the market... so now they will stop supporting XP after SP3... and I wouldn't doubt if they purposly sabatosh xp when they release SP3. Just to make XP look buggy and Vista look like it finally works better than XP. Don't get me wrong... Vista does have a few great new features in it. But they could have easily been updates to XP.
Image
--Siginet--

Techware
Your Virtual Technician
Computer Management Software

User avatar
RogueSpear
Posts: 1155
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:50 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY

Post by RogueSpear » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:24 pm

I ran Vista on one of my computers as the main OS for a couple of months during the RC stage. I never had too many serious problems in the way of crashes, bugs, etc. The exception was VS2005 (I wish there was a smiley thing for irony). Perhaps I was lucky to have hardware components that were well supported or maybe it's because I don't game on my computers - I game on consoles.

My big problems with Vista are kind of basic. Change for the sake of change is not good. Change for the sake of improving something is. I found lots of the former and none of the latter. Things are moved around or renamed, dialog boxes redesigned, etc. for apparently no reason whatsoever. This is extraordinarily frustrating to me. It seems like not too much was upgraded but rather received completely meaningless change and was suddenly labeled as "NEW" or "UPGRADED".

Built-in DRM and the Software Protection Platform. I could go on and on about this but I'll just poke at the basic fact that this seems to be where 95% of the development effort went into. And for what? I think to consume RAM and CPU cycles. No thanks.

Lastly, Microsoft has always had a way of making the most dumbass decisions regarding default settings. Windows XP suffers from this terribly as well. Whenever I see a fresh Windows XP installation that isn't unattended, tweaked, etc. I am shocked at how lame the OS is by default. Luckily a few Microsoft supplied addons (ex: RAW Thumnailer, Photo Info, etc), a few third party utilities and accessories, and a healthy dose of registry tweaks and it's practically a whole new operating system. Well Vista has a lot more crap in it which means a whole lot more idiotic default settings and services turned on by default. Unfortunately I was never really able to tweak and modify Vista to my liking. No matter what I did to it I still really longed for XP.

In the end I couldn't wait to jump ship and get back to XP like I can't wait to crawl into my own bed after two weeks out of town. I intended to go a full three months with Vista, but only made it two. Lately I've been falling way behind in making installers, scripts, etc partly because I can't tear myself away from Linux. It's certainly way way behind anything Microsoft as far as non-technical users go, but generally once it's set up and running anyone can use it. I've set up more than a couple of people's home desktops with Ubuntu lately. I'm trying to figure out how to do what we do here - unattended installs - in that environment. I don't see Microsoft backing down from any of there many mistakes or design decisions. I think Microsoft Bob was the last time Microsoft would concede to having committed any acts of foolishness. At this point Microsoft could re-release Windows 3.0 as the successor to Vista and it would still shatter all manner of sales records. Kinda sucks when they got you by the short hairs.

techtype
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:46 pm

Post by techtype » Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:59 am

All I can do is add an anecdotal reply. I've been running Vista on an nForce4 motherboard with an Opteron processor (not exactly state of the art) for 4 months. It did take a little effort to tweak (since it was new to me), but I've had zero problems with it. I stayed with it because after tweaking, it's faster than XP. Other than gaming (which I don't do), I demand a lot out of a system and Vista has been able to meet all my needs. It runs fine on a small network with other XP and 2003 machines.

I would predict that in another year, the complaints will fade away and be forgotten. On the other hand, I have to admit -- having to learn a new OS along with the virus and malware problem almost got me to switch to Apple.

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:14 am

I game in XP x64 and at this moment I have two words: "kicking" and "screaming." I was in the Vista Customer Preview Program, and once the novelty wore off there was no real benefit for me to continue using Vista over XP. I tried both the x64 and 32-bit versions in day-to-day usage.

There is currently no real motivation for me to switch. The only compelling Vista-specific game is Halo 2 for PC. DirectX10 is still in its infancy. And both feel like they've been crippled to work only with Vista. There is no technical reason whatsoever that these could not have been ported to XP.

With my modestly powerful PCs, I can afford to wait until my next major hardware overhaul in a couple years to consider a new Microsoft OS. I may even be better served with Linux for specific hardware configurations at this point.

User avatar
RogueSpear
Posts: 1155
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:50 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY

Post by RogueSpear » Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:43 am

5eraph wrote:I game in XP x64 and at this moment I have two words: "kicking" and "screaming." I was in the Vista Customer Preview Program, and once the novelty wore off there was no real benefit for me to continue using Vista over XP. I tried both the x64 and 32-bit versions in day-to-day usage.
I left the x64 side of things completely out of my rant above. As a last resort with Vista I tried the x64 version for about a day. My real interest is in eventually going x64 if for no other reason the RAM. Well nothing seemed to work right for me at all in x64 under Vista. And anything with a shell extension was utterly pooched - even when there was a x64 specific version.

If one could make the argument that Vista in general provides little to no benefit, you could easily argue that Vista x64 is absolute trash. It reminds me of alpha stage software.

User avatar
5eraph
Site Admin
Posts: 4619
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:07 am

I only need x64 for the enhanced memory support on my daily PC. It currently has 4GB RAM plus two nVidia 7800GTX cards with 256MB each in SLI. 32-bit XP reports 2.5GB of installed RAM with this system, which is unacceptable. As often as I use VMs, I need access to all of my installed memory.

BTW, RogueSpear, many shell extensions are still hit and miss in XP x64, at least on my system. I'd recommend thorough testing to make sure you're not unpleasantly surprised. For example, Unlocker was completely borked last time I checked. :(

User avatar
Siginet
Site Admin
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:07 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Post by Siginet » Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:17 pm

My big problems with Vista are kind of basic. Change for the sake of change is not good. Change for the sake of improving something is. I found lots of the former and none of the latter. Things are moved around or renamed, dialog boxes redesigned, etc. for apparently no reason whatsoever. This is extraordinarily frustrating to me. It seems like not too much was upgraded but rather received completely meaningless change and was suddenly labeled as "NEW" or "UPGRADED".
My theory on that is that microsoft ran out of ideas to better Windows XP. So instead of bettering XP (which does not make them more money) they decided to make un-needed changes to make the system look new. I mean if you think about it. Microsoft will make Billions of dollars from vista... that they would not make on XP anymore. How many people do you know that do not allready have windows XP?
Image
--Siginet--

Techware
Your Virtual Technician
Computer Management Software

newsposter
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Post by newsposter » Tue Oct 09, 2007 2:04 pm

some web site that tracks browser visits says that the number of 'vista' visitors is the same as 'windows98'.

User avatar
buletov
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:30 am

Post by buletov » Tue Oct 09, 2007 2:56 pm

But it will rise as more and more new computers come with Vista preinstalled.
Fortunately, EU is about to persuade computer makers to offer all computer brands and models
without preinstalled OS, so for example, you could buy the best Toshiba or Sony laptop
without being forced to pay for Windows as well.
Never know what life is gonna throw at you.

User avatar
Zacam
Moderator
Posts: 615
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by Zacam » Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:32 pm

5eraph wrote:I only need x64 for the enhanced memory support on my daily PC. It currently has 4GB RAM plus two nVidia 7800GTX cards with 256MB each in SLI. 32-bit XP reports 2.5GB of installed RAM with this system, which is unacceptable. As often as I use VMs, I need access to all of my installed memory.

BTW, RogueSpear, many shell extensions are still hit and miss in XP x64, at least on my system. I'd recommend thorough testing to make sure you're not unpleasantly surprised. For example, Unlocker was completely borked last time I checked. :(
I have a DFI LanParty UT with 4gb of OCZ and 2 8800 GTX cards. I still run XP 32bit. Yes, I know the system properties screen only says "3GB" but trust me, 4 is there and it is using it. I don't like that the OS at 4gb reserves an entire gig, but that just means I won't have to worry about anything I have running in the background interfearing with what I'm playing.

I don't know why yours would only report 2.5. That is exceedingly strange.

To keep this on-topic, I've tried running both versions of Vista. I got tired of it second guessing me like it was Shizophrenics week on Jeopardy and rarely managing to accomplish anything that I wanted to do. Creative getting their sound broken, buggy and crappy months to get OpenGL "almost" working, when I do music compilation and game coding, I'll stick with XP because what I need and have to do cannot be done in Vista.

User avatar
runningfool87
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:43 pm

Post by runningfool87 » Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:51 pm

driver support is what got me. one of my old laptops had an AMD processor, so i figured id go all the way and try out vista x64. results:

-no ethernet driver support
-no wifi driver support
-no card reader support
-NO PEERGUARDIAN SUPPORT IN EITHER VERSION
-absolute memory pig...with 1.5 GB RAM
-etc, etc, etc

the problem is, the improvements in vista were rushed and only serve a niche market. there are actual security improvements, but only a security nut or someone who is constantly hacked would notice. probably the only thing i liked about vista was that when you played a fullscreen game all other processes are placed in low priority...but even that only has limited uses. then theres all the stuff that microsoft just didnt have time for. example: instead of a new file system in WinFS, we get "superfetch"...prefetch with some reworked code.

anyone else waiting for vienna? :P

User avatar
RogueSpear
Posts: 1155
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:50 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY

Post by RogueSpear » Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:10 am

What I wish they would backport to XP is the TCP/IP stack :( That's probably going to be what eventually drives people away from XP - in several years.

soulstace
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 4:29 am

Post by soulstace » Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:32 pm

Yes, DirectX 10+ is another factor that has pushed PC gamers away from XP.

But it's almost a pointless cause (besides some better graphics, and more profits for MS) because most games actually run slower on Vista anyway..
Last edited by soulstace on Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Siginet
Site Admin
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:07 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Post by Siginet » Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:35 pm

They probably knew they had screwed up gaming in vista so they threw together dx10 hoping to fix it.
Image
--Siginet--

Techware
Your Virtual Technician
Computer Management Software

User avatar
muiz
Moderator
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 7:51 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by muiz » Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:04 am

This is no way near windows ME like they saying here.....ME was crap
Vista works fine here, no problems, much better then XP

User avatar
bober101
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: canadia!

Post by bober101 » Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:48 pm

beautiful isint better.
XP theme source patcher
patches/overwrites ure default xp visual resources

The Creator
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:10 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Post by The Creator » Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:14 pm

I honestly have tried vista for about 2 weeks and i had to get rid of it. It ran my games slower, kept on messing me up with renamed items, and didn't actually have any useful new features over xp. You can even make xp look like vista if you try enough though when i used vlite to strip out all the bloated crap it ran at about xp's pace but still is less compatible. My honest opinion is that ubuntu linux or a similar distribution will take over apple and microsoft because it is so flexible to your needs and you can have it set up exactly how you want it. Also, it's free! Sorry M$

User avatar
Sanjay
I can't read
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:28 am
Location: New Delhi, India

Post by Sanjay » Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:00 am

Any operating system that cannot even handle the most basic of tasks, i.e. 'cut, paste, copy & delete of files and folders', has to be considered as crap. It is surprising, actually shocking how incompetent Vista is and how Microsoft has screwed up some of the most basics of features. Microsoft really needs to learn the virtues of leaving 'well enough alone', the Start menu ofcourse being a perfect example of how to take a perfectly functional and well designed GUI and make it absolutely impractical and almot unusable. Hot swappable SATA has worked for me for atleast a few yrs now, but then along comes Vista and guess what, SATA is no longer hot swappable. The fact is, that BSOD is something that had been relegated to the Sysinternals BSOD screensaver since the advent of XP until Vista emerged to remind everyone of what we had really NOT been missing for the last 6 yrs.

the_doc735
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 11:25 am

long live XP, down with Vista!

Post by the_doc735 » Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:37 pm

I seem to remember everyone waging the same criticisms at XP when that came out. More agony when SP1 came out and yet more agony when SP2 came out?
So. in 6 years time when Vista is mature and supported by all hardware and software and MS release something "NEW" - we'll all be praising Vista and condeming whatever takes its place, as per usual!
TELL ME THE OLD, OLD, STORY and get the violins out. REMEMBER! - everyone thought XP was crap for at least the first 12 months too! (e.g. buggy, unstable, nothing written for it, no drivers, old inadequate PCs that could not supply the physical grunt necessary to run it efficiently etc.) "but!" - here comes Vista and ALL IS FORGOTTEN AND FORGIVEN XP! - HALE XP - hip hip hooray!
So what exactly is going on here with the collective human consciousness condition? What is happening I wonder?

User avatar
RogueSpear
Posts: 1155
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:50 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY

Re: long live XP, down with Vista!

Post by RogueSpear » Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:00 pm

the_doc735 wrote:So what exactly is going on here with the collective human consciousness condition? What is happening I wonder?
I mentioned above how a default XP installation sucks and that only with direct intervention does start to become an acceptable operating system. There is nothing particularly deep or profound about understanding why everyone hates Vista. Microsoft made a bunch of cosmetic changes and touts that as something earth shattering. On the other hand it's obvious that they spent a great deal of time and resources engineering all manner of DRM and anti-piracy mechanisms. But those things don't sell operating systems, so they're not really mentioned (other than at shareholder meetings).

armond
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 11:43 am
Location: Glendale, CA USA

Post by armond » Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:44 pm

Guys, Check out this article about Vista:
http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13506_1-9837180-17.html

TJHart85
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 4:15 pm

Post by TJHart85 » Sun Dec 23, 2007 6:57 pm

I tried it with 2 gigs of RAM & it crashed my apps all the time.

I did use the x64 version, so in order to give a "fair" review, I'd have had to have tried the x32 as well, but I gotta say, I wasn't impressed at all.

Apps crashing, random reboots, BSOD, etc...

100% of my drivers worked though :-)

I'll give it a go again with SP1 & see how it goes, but till then, VISTA SUCKS!
Numbers written on restaurant bills within the confines of restaurants do not follow the same mathematical laws as numbers written on any other pieces of paper in any other parts of the Universe.
--Douglas Adams

User avatar
Sanjay
I can't read
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:28 am
Location: New Delhi, India

Post by Sanjay » Mon Dec 24, 2007 10:20 am

SP1 seems to make no difference to my Vista experience. It is as dreadful as ever. For me personally this is the worst OS ever to come out of Redmond, even ME was better than this piece of crap.

User avatar
RogueSpear
Posts: 1155
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:50 pm
Location: Buffalo, NY

Post by RogueSpear » Mon Dec 24, 2007 10:27 am

armond wrote:Guys, Check out this article about Vista:
http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13506_1-9837180-17.html
This one is kind of along the same lines. Very amusing too.

http://dotnet.org.za/codingsanity/archi ... ws-xp.aspx

User avatar
dgelwin
Posts: 1152
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 1:33 am
Location: Tegucigalpa, Honduras

Post by dgelwin » Mon Dec 24, 2007 11:26 am

I personally think it depends on the use your going to give the machine, if you want a powerful gaming machine then forget it vista is not for you, but if your looking for a simple to use interface and easy learning curve then its ggodanough i setup a vista home premium pc for my mom she uses it for editing pictures she swaps memory cards like i take breaths of air, she has it hooked up to her entertainment system with a remote, she rips and converts dvds, create spreadsheets and presentations, and listens to her music wirelessly using her bluetooth headphones i bought her for her phone lol and so far she has had no problems, and that that she hardly ever turns off the pc except to maybe power cycle it once every couple of days, and i think it does the job just fine, now for gaming vista sucks, and its gonna suck for some time until game developers start developing for directx10 whic btw also sucks, but its still a baby and for its age i think directx10 is doing a really great job, i mean any one hear remember way back when directx7 was released to the public it pretty much suck the same at first then just like an Indonesian prostitute it got much better with age :D i think vista as soon as developers pick up on it and start developing specificaly for it will become much better, my best comparison would be the iPhone Virgin, VS. iPhone Jailbreaked, i mean has anyone noticed yet how much the iPhone sucks without third party apllications, i think its the apps that make the OS and windows has always had the majority just give it time and we will see if they follow suite to vista
Don't sweat petty things....or pet sweaty things

User avatar
RaGhul
Posts: 375
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:56 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by RaGhul » Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:59 pm

I think RogueSpear pretty much explained my feelings on Vista back in post#4. (Very well-written, btw.)

But, to sum it all up:
No, it's not ME. But it's obviously not as good as people were expecting from a development cycle of 6 yrs.

It's a "dressed-up" XP with less compatibility that hogs up more resources. It was designed as a midway point btwn XP and Windows 7 that became a "major release" due to the fact the Redmond needed a cash infusion. As many tech sites have said, Microsoft's biggest competition is Microsoft itself. In other words, Vista's biggest competition is XP.

Windows 7 promises to be much better (as long as MicroSucks can finally deliver the goods they've been ranting on about for over 5 yrs.) I suggest anyone who can wait does just that: wait.

Let's all of us just hope that the drones don't all eat up Vista, and M$ is forced to push out 7. Otherwise, (as much as I love it) we might all be forced to live with XP for 5 more yrs.
:wink:

User avatar
ENU_user
Posts: 1253
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:42 pm

Post by ENU_user » Sun Jan 27, 2008 12:46 am

the biggest factor everyone is missing is in the MUI aspect in vista
did you know you can change the language interface at anytime to any none predefined language\group at any point, actually this can also be done per user using the same pc

with MUI on Vista there is no more need for local files anymore as everything regarding that is layered so, the coast around language support is now flattened to zero if you must compare it with xp

this reduces the coast not only in MS but also in organizations needing to offer extra language support ,regarding what MUI can offer ...

in general i suppose this is a big scoop with vista.

Post Reply