Living with Vista

The main distinction with Vista over XP is that your RAM will actually be used almost 100% all of the time. Like I was taught in first year of uni.

 

Been pretty impressed with vista so far, but i do agree about the UI. Its terrible! I get lost just trying to find network related information. Ah well, i'll find my way round eventually. Not very impressed with vista using half my system ram when its doing nothing though...

 

Got RAM? Why not use it!

More secure etc = all good reasons to upgrade.

Isnt the Mac dock that silly thing that has loads of icons on.. much like the "quick start bar" that has been in windows since 95? (and you can make your start bar hide its self .. much like the dock...)

 

Maybe 'm using the wrong word. Microsoft enthusiast is more descriptive, since I've actually used all three major OSs and I base my opinions on the evidence gleamed from using them.
It's not as if I hate Linux or something (I love Gentoo).

 

Just had my first proper go in Vista (Business).

Seems slightly more sluggish with programs opening and closing than I am used to with my XP install. Few other things seem extra fiddly - but it could grow on me. I need more time to explore the functions and tweaks.

 

oh honestly, its a load of rubbish

http://badvista.fsf.org/what-s-wrong-with-microsoft-windows-vista

 

After purchasing my new gaming system, C2D E6600 with a 8800GTS for the soul purpose of gaming, I've decided to stick with XP Pro, and not jump on the Vista bandwagon. Why? Because I honestly can't be f'd figuring out which version of Vista to get, only to then have to learn my way around the new user interface. Not to mention forking out a heap of money for the new OS, which has nothing really new over my current install of XP along with all of the app's I've already installed and setup.

Speaking of the old software & hardware, is it 100% supported under Vista? Well, it works 100% on XP, so if it ain't broke, don't fix! Especially with reports of slower FPS on Vista when compared to XP when it comes to games. Most of my time is spent either playing games, or recording and composing music, which I can achieve in XP just fine.

With that, I'll be formatting my old box soon enough, and I'll be sticking Ubuntu on it. When was the last time you tried Linux? Mine was about 5 years ago, and I ran away screaming from it... So I thought it was about time to check out the scene again, and oh my, how things have changed for the better.

2 important facts about Ubuntu really took hold of me.

1) It's free
2) It's simple to use.

By simple, I mean that I downloaded the Ubuntu ISO, burnt it to CD. Reset my PC and booted from the CD, and.. that's it. A couple of minutes loading time, NOTHING MANUALLY CONFIGURED AT ALL, and I was surfing the web (using firefox!!!) as soon as the OS had fully loaded. NOTE, that I didn't even install the OS, it just booted up from the CD!!!

So yeah, back on topic, Living with Vista? Hopefully not... I like my money in my wallet, kthx.

 

I will have to agree with the article in full swing. Though the point I think people are missing is the need to upgrade an already working system to an operating system that may cause issues. It would never occur to me to replace a working install of XP with a less compatable version of windows. Sure I have Vista installed on a secondary drive but what other use can I find for it despite to show off to friends. Sometimes you have a hard enough time finding drivers for windows XP.... I dont even want to think about the lengths you have to goto for vista. Personally I will wait till vienna.

If anyone can see the similarities here:

Windows 1-3 > Windows 95 > Windows 98 > Windows ME
Windows NT > Windows 2000 > windows Xp > Windows Vista


... just waiting for Vienna. Ive decided to let Windows ME, I mean Vista blow over.

 

May I ask what's the point of a 400€ GPU if not for DX10? I you are never going to get Vista, you may as well sell the GTS and get a 7900GTX or somesuch. Less heat, less energy consumption, similar performance in DX9 games at normal resolutions...

 

why not?

In XP, it might sit there only using 120MB of ram, but what that means is when you load something, the 'spare' ram has to be loaded with data.

With vista, (and this will only happen after you've been using it for a while) it loads the programs YOU use most often, and when you need to clear the RAM, i.e. when running a game, it pages that data off.

Adding a second GIG of ram would help with the paging issue, but for most things, its now actually using my hardware, and thats what i bought it for.


Also, key thing to remember, and security minded, is the fact that th RAM is used on a random basis, i.e. when a program is loaded, it uses whatever bit of ram is free, and a different bit each time. This is for security reasons, disabling malicious code from running from unexecuted data in RAM.

Its complicated, and most won't even notice, but its a big step forward.



EDIT: good point made by warrior_rocker... why upgrade if nothing is broken?

Its a sad fact but really did everyone expect EVERYTHING to work beautfully? If so why? Why woudl MS want to keep supporting stuff that really shouldn't have been supported in XP when really they want us all to move on to new hardware and new functionality.


BTW - Add/Remove Programs IS in the control panel, its called 'Programs and Features' and works arguable a lot better than in XP, it includes drivers as well as programs and is constantly updating.


Anyone else notice the little things that are MASSIVELY improved?

Like, when you put in a CD in XP and click on My Computer, you have to wait for the CD to initialise BEFORE you can click on ANY icon in my computer, and in some case before the icons even appear - now, loading a CD times out the CD drive icon in 'Computer' but still allows you access to other items in the list. Its a million and one little improvements like this that make Vista a valid switch for anyone who ENJOYS using their computer.

for eveyone else, just stick with XP and....

 

I say wait for SP1.
- By then their will more features and/or improved features, and more bugs fixed.
- Hardware manufactures will finally release proper Driver support.
- Software "manufactures" will finally be forced to make software that should have been done properly since WinXP (isn't that the reason why most people is not using a limited account?!? For me yes.). In effect UAC will stop be annoying.
- Maybe a Tweak UI might be released, and you can edit some interface stuff. We have to wait and see.

Vista is failing, because software and hardware company were too lazy to look at their device/software with Vista public beta. Which was the MAIN point of it.
At least thanks to many many beta testers, Vista is not bombarded with bugs (TRUST ME Vista RC1 was HORRIBLE. However RC2, seamed at the same level of XP SP2 fully updated. And the final versions, has bug fixes that was never fixed since the original WinNT!)

 

theres a good article on the Inquirer here: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38419

that kind of says what i feel about vista, and it follows along with what most of the Apple fans are saying. Essentially, Microsoft's achilles heel is the fact that it has to support a whole legacy contingent of hardware and software.

You can't put OSX Tiger onto a G3 Mac. But you can put vista onto a three year old Pentium 4, or even a pentium 3 for that matter. It also supports - out of the box - more hardware configurations than any other OS has ever done before. The fact that some things dont work, is merely a hiccup.

If we wanted revolution, ie, winfs and all the other radical changes that WERE planned and then binned, we would have had to deal with an even longer list of things that no longer worked. Its a choice.

 

I recall perfectly that When XP came out... most people had WIn98.
Windows XP was extremely buggy, at a point where MS had to pay you to install it. When people upgraded to XP... most application failed to even run. Yet, for some strange reasons people did not complain as much. Maybe because less people had the internet?!?! Who knows, but people were using Windows XP pre SP1, and very very very very little said on the topic of switch to Linux or Mac OS, even back then Mac OS was clearly better.

Windows XP has a million editions too:
- Windows XP Home upgarde
- Windows XP Home
- Windows XP Pro upgarde
- Windows XP Pro
- Windows XP Pro 64-bit edition
- Windows XP Media center
- Windows XP Tablet PC edition.
WOW, 7 versions!

Yet no one complains... when MS add 1 more version.. it's "OMG they are millions of version, NO one will know what to pick!!!" Come one.. stop with the BS guys.

In fact I see no one saying how great that FINALLY you get get tablet PC functionality and 32/64-bit version into all editions. With XP, if you have a tablet PC with a 64-bit processor and you want to use WinXp 64-bit (to run 64-bit applications) or want media center... why should anyone drop tablet PC functionality for it. I see no one complaining....

Windows Vista is the first OS (in MS windows series), were by default it optimizes for launch (under XP it only does it at first run... but the second you install your drivers and so on... you see that the startup that used to be nearly instant, takes forever to startup. Also, Vista auto-defrag, update, check for anti-spy/mal-ware is all done automatically. For you guys your don't care in most part, but for many of million of users, that don't even know what disk defrag is... will make BIG difference with Vista.

Vista was A LOT to offer (MUCH MUCH more then when XP came out from Win98 (that's 2-3 (if you count WinMe) versions spaced out)). Yet, for some reasons many of you guys, look at the cover of Vista and judge. You should discover and use for at LEAST 1-2 months before making judgment.

I used Vista since it was Beta1 (still got the iso file), under public beta..
At the begging I was like most of you guys, but now I'm under XP (as public beta ended), And I CAN SERIOUSLY can not live with XP anymore. It's crap, buggy, slow, unresponsive when you lunch big applications, And I REALLY need 2 monitors. Then with Vista thanks to it's transparency, preview on Alt+tab and windows flip. I'm perfectly fine with my 17inch CRT 1280x1024 screen. And FINALLY Internet Explorer is not included anymore in the OS. That means when you lunch big applications, you can still lunch something else in the same folder, or continue to browse around. Also it fixes MANY MANY bugs.

 

[delete - sorry]

 

I was pretty excited about getting Vista but it was a nightmare. It wouldn't accept some Vista-compatible software, it nags incessantly when you want to delete or install something, it is pretty to look at but whoever set up Windows Explorer must have been dyslexic! I did a search to see if there would be a problem reformatting with XP and everything I saw made it sound ok, so I tried. I have the full OS disk but Vista wouldn't accept it after it had run through a few start-up screens. XP makes a lot more sense! I hope Windows 7 isn't like Vista!