News Acer takes a swing at Vista

"Vista takes to much resources"
"Vista is unstable (because of bad drivers)"
"Vista have bad compatibility (again, drivers)"
"Vista is too expensive"
"Vista have lots of functions i'll never use, so why upgrade?"

Turn back your clock about 5 years and you'll see that we had the exact same questions then, only "Vista" was replaced with "XP".

Why are people so afraid of new things? the same happened here on bit a few weeks ago aswell. Everyone was afraid of the new forum structure, and "noone" liked it. How is this situation now? Sure, both the forums and vista needs some fine tuning, but it will get there pretty soon.

As for the comment from acer, they just complain that their bad hardware can't keep up with time. With XP they could put in bad hardware that XP never used anyway, but looked good on the advertising. Now, however, the OS actually NEED this hardware.

the strange thing is that it doesn't seem like ano other big companies have this problems. (HP actually have drivers released for vista on their older models, that was never meant to run vista. (they just became "vista capable" after a couple years on the market)

I see why they do this. Stuff like this can be software related. If you have tried to talk to an average person trying to explain a problem over the phone, and afterwards you get to see the problems yourself, you will often find that the explanation and the actual symptom/problem doesn't match AT ALL. This is because they have talked to a "computer expert" (the neighbors 12 year old son...) who "know" what the problem is, so they tell what they think is the problem, and not the symptoms.

You have no idea how many times i have heard "it just doesn't work" from a customer. Trying to get them to tell me what the symptom is, they don't know anything. (some times i wonder if the word "symptom" is even a part of the Norwegian language)

Why don't you still run MS DOS 6.22? (or Win3.11 if you want the windows functionality) It uses very little resources, you know.

Exactly!

You just did that yourself...




I have 3 computers running here. They have the exact same specs. One running XP, one running Vista, and one running Kubuntu (Linux).

The difference in performance on day to day use isn't that different. Vista is slower at startup. (Kubuntu is slower than XP, BTW)

(I could go on here, but then this just becomes yet another Windows VS. Linux thread....)

(Edit: The one running XP runs 512MB less RAM. (1,5gig VS 2gig on the other two))

 

I know I was disapointed to see Aero lag with the GeForce Go 7400 of my laptop and I never tried it again ever since...

It was a warez version though so it might explain why... When I will upgrade my PC, I will buy it for 30$ (computer science student). But as of now, XP is exactly what I want in an OS, especially after tweaking it.

I will have a hard time to adapt to vista :-/ ...

Is it possible to use StyleXP skins on vista? Because I would rather use my current LSD theme than Aero

 

Are you sure you didn't have some sort of power saving on your GFX "card"?

I know some laptops have problems even playing DVD in XP with power saving activated.

 

I dont think I did ! It was a while ago though so there is no way I can be sure right now (running ubuntu 7.10 now)
And it certainly wasn't a lack of power since this is the laptop :

Aero was usable, but not confortable. It was like playing a 3D RTS at 10fps, it's playable...but annoying

 

Funny, I saw laptops with Geforce 6150 run Vista aero fine, and very smoothly.

 

I run it on a laptop with a 128MB X600 GFX card. 1,85GHz Pentium M and 2GB of RAM. (Modified Compaq NX8220)

 

no i didn't

I'm not going to buy vista for DX10 - I'm not going to be bullied by MS to pay £100+ to get a new OS when they really could have made DX10 work in XP - maybe not as well as vista, but it would have been possible
Plus for the time being there isn't a single decent DX10 game out, and there isn't anything coming out yet that will require DX10 (and is a decent game)

And the searchable start menu is nice, but not nice enough to make me change OS

I'm not anti-MS as such, i use XP - OK id rather have a choice (games = windows for the time being), windows does do a good job, its very hard supporting billions of things and a huge backwards compatibility catalogue
But MS's business practises are sickening, and i don't like the way that they force everyone to do things their way

Hell we cant even use UEFI because windows doesn't support it yet, and therefore no-one else on the planet can use it because MS dint support it people wont make motherboards for it (well outside the server market)