Everybody Hates Vista....But Why?
- Thread starter SacremPyrobolum
- Start date
Recommended Videos
My pc came with vista pre-installed and apart from the UAC thing its never been a spot of trouble, but saying that, my laptop came with win7 pre-installed and i've had no problems either!
I thought I was the odd one out because I didn't hate vista.
I have read this thread and I am now happy.
I thought I was the odd one out because I didn't hate vista.
I have read this thread and I am now happy.
That's actually not the primary problem with Vista. The issue with Vista is that it's incredibly bloated with all sorts of unnecessary and useless widgets and various background processes. This makes the OS incredibly slow comparatively, and is why most people hate the thing. It's packed to the gills with unneeded crap that you can't easily turn off. Fortunately, 7 came along and basically gave us Vista without that crap, so now we're all good.SacremPyrobolum said:
I know, It isn't shit as nearly everbody say it is I even think it's better than XP.TestECull said:I'm still using Vista on a technicality[footnote]Realtek's Win7 nForce 4 audio driver gets stuck in an install loop. By the time I reinstall Windows I oughtta have a decent sound card and/or an entirely new rig, so I'll be moving on to 7.[/footnote]. I can tell you it's a combination of 95% PEBKAC and 5% bandwagoneers. I don't have a damn bit of trouble with it. It isn't buggy. It isn't laggy. It isn't overly bloated[footnote]I'm smart enough to use MSConfig to disable most of the shit I don't need.[/footnote]. It isn't unstable. It isn't incompatible. It isn't a memory whore(That title goes to Firefox). It's just attacked endlessly by fanboys, morons and bandwagoneers who don't like it is all.
It's nothing like ME, that's for sure.
For me it's that it seems so desperate to make sure you don't step out of line.
"Are you SURE you want to open that programme?"
"Are you SURE you want to close this other one?"
"Are you SURE you want to install this game, it could be harmful ya know."
"Are you SURE you want to punch a crack in my screen and throw me across the room?"
"Okay good. Just lookin' out for ya big guy."
It's like an over-protective parent. I fear it's one step away from becoming the preliminary form of GLaDOS...
...and now I've ensured I won't get much sleep tonight.
"Are you SURE you want to open that programme?"
"Are you SURE you want to close this other one?"
"Are you SURE you want to install this game, it could be harmful ya know."
"Are you SURE you want to punch a crack in my screen and throw me across the room?"
"Okay good. Just lookin' out for ya big guy."
It's like an over-protective parent. I fear it's one step away from becoming the preliminary form of GLaDOS...
...and now I've ensured I won't get much sleep tonight.
As a little side note, UAC is a good thing people, it's only flaw is that it isn't quite strong enough. Linux, famed for being more secure than Windows applies exactly the same type of system, where tasks which could damage the computer require an admin password. That includes accessing an alternative hard drive.
UAC and a limited user account are the first two steps to setting up a safe Windows system, the third and fourth being Microsoft Security Essentials and a hardware firewall.
Wow, just wow.
And I've never believe in 'if it aint broke don't fix it'.
You are essentially running against all of the best advice security experts, and the fact that you have managed to keep your system running well is not an example I'd like to see lead to people taking your approach.
UAC and a limited user account are the first two steps to setting up a safe Windows system, the third and fourth being Microsoft Security Essentials and a hardware firewall.
Not all issues are down to user error. Some come in through vulnerabilities in things like flash and other components. Some of these are injected into adverts or components of otherwise reputable sites. Some of these have a hell of an easier time with a system which automatically grants them full administrative access as yours does cause I do not believe for a second you run a limited account.TestECull said:
Wow, just wow.
And I've never believe in 'if it aint broke don't fix it'.
You are essentially running against all of the best advice security experts, and the fact that you have managed to keep your system running well is not an example I'd like to see lead to people taking your approach.
Ok the problems with Vista was thus:
Drivers. Drivers & Drivers.
The OS was simply not supported at the developer level and thus finding stable working drivers was a nightmare and it created a vicious circle where people were not making Vista or 64bit drivers a priority because so few were using the OS and so few people were using the OS due to the instability from poor driver support.
Drivers. Drivers & Drivers.
The OS was simply not supported at the developer level and thus finding stable working drivers was a nightmare and it created a vicious circle where people were not making Vista or 64bit drivers a priority because so few were using the OS and so few people were using the OS due to the instability from poor driver support.
I have already posted this at least three times but here we go again. I was employed as an IT professional during both the Vist and Win7 roll outs. I had plenty of time to see the reaction of a great many people and have experienced most actual problems either OS has actually caused.
1) At release there were numerous software compatibility problems. For example, Outlook XP and prior would not store a password properly because it required an OS feature that was removed due to countless security problems associated with it. Driver issues persisted far longer than they should have. In most cases, these were the result of a third party (that is, not microsoft or the user) causing a problem by failing to support their product for one reason or another.
2) Vista (Win7 to an extent of course) required substantially more horsepower to simply run. When Vista was first released, computer manufacturers were quick to produce the ever popular cheap computers that just barely met the minimum standard for Vista. With Vista consuming most of the system's resources, the customer would believe that they had been cheated having bought a computer that was somehow slower than the one they had just replaced! This is a result of customer ignorance and, to a lesser extent, borderline predatory activity on behalf of the major PC manufacturers.
3) Vista significantly altered the GUI. If there is one thing people hate more than anything it is learning to do something over again. Consider the related complaints regarding Office 2007.
4) The UAC feature, designed to prevent unauthorized access to critical files, constantly prompts the user for permission to do something. Being the single biggest threat to the security of the system, it makes sense to at least warn the user when they are doing something that has the potential to harm their computer. Most people however do not have enough knowledge to get anything useful out of these messages and simply click through, mildly annoyed at the interruption. Others, fearful of doing something to hurt their computer and utterly ignorant will panic each time the message appears. While well intentioned, the flaw here is obvious: if you know enough that the messages might be useful it is unlikely that the UAC will actually help you in any way, and if you do not then they are simply an inconvenience.
5) The biggest problem in my experience had nothing to do with the previous four, but was rather a social problem. Simply put, people had heard that the product had problems and they simply refused to try it. As of August when I left tech support there were people who still refused to upgrade to a new OS even when they had no sensible argument as to why.
1) At release there were numerous software compatibility problems. For example, Outlook XP and prior would not store a password properly because it required an OS feature that was removed due to countless security problems associated with it. Driver issues persisted far longer than they should have. In most cases, these were the result of a third party (that is, not microsoft or the user) causing a problem by failing to support their product for one reason or another.
2) Vista (Win7 to an extent of course) required substantially more horsepower to simply run. When Vista was first released, computer manufacturers were quick to produce the ever popular cheap computers that just barely met the minimum standard for Vista. With Vista consuming most of the system's resources, the customer would believe that they had been cheated having bought a computer that was somehow slower than the one they had just replaced! This is a result of customer ignorance and, to a lesser extent, borderline predatory activity on behalf of the major PC manufacturers.
3) Vista significantly altered the GUI. If there is one thing people hate more than anything it is learning to do something over again. Consider the related complaints regarding Office 2007.
4) The UAC feature, designed to prevent unauthorized access to critical files, constantly prompts the user for permission to do something. Being the single biggest threat to the security of the system, it makes sense to at least warn the user when they are doing something that has the potential to harm their computer. Most people however do not have enough knowledge to get anything useful out of these messages and simply click through, mildly annoyed at the interruption. Others, fearful of doing something to hurt their computer and utterly ignorant will panic each time the message appears. While well intentioned, the flaw here is obvious: if you know enough that the messages might be useful it is unlikely that the UAC will actually help you in any way, and if you do not then they are simply an inconvenience.
5) The biggest problem in my experience had nothing to do with the previous four, but was rather a social problem. Simply put, people had heard that the product had problems and they simply refused to try it. As of August when I left tech support there were people who still refused to upgrade to a new OS even when they had no sensible argument as to why.
I remember having to spend a great many hours modifying a version of the Geforce 7600 drivers so that I could use them with my laptop and actually leverage that second card I bought. It took six months to get an official driver to support this feature.Void(null) said:
My brother got a laptop that my dad got for work, but they quickly decided that he needed something better and let him keep the first one they gave him. It was running Vista, which my brother and I were skeptical about because of all the blasting we heard on the internet. We booted it up and were surprised to see how fast and smooth everything worked. That was for the first couple of months at least. He used it exactly like he used XP, nothing too flashy, and the thing runs at less than a snail's pace now. It direly needs a reformat and it barely has anything on it, and all malware scans come up nil. I know it supports better hardware, but it really isn't a selling point when so many people claim that it venerates the operating system it was supposed to replace.
Now I know that newer versions of Vista work much better than the launch, but I don't see why I would want to go back when I can just upgrade to Windows 7. Still sold on XP though.
Now I know that newer versions of Vista work much better than the launch, but I don't see why I would want to go back when I can just upgrade to Windows 7. Still sold on XP though.
It was too much of an in between that didn't really give concessions.
Probably the single biggest thing about vista is the jump in system resources you need to run it. Reasonably for any mildly demanding application it needs 2 gigs of RAM to work. That's more than what most mid / high end XP OS based computers ran. My parents old thing only has 512 mbs of RAM and it still chugs along like a trooper 7 years later.
It was also the start of an overhaul that wouldn't be fully realized till Windows 7 and naturally no one likes buying into a work in progress.
Probably the single biggest thing about vista is the jump in system resources you need to run it. Reasonably for any mildly demanding application it needs 2 gigs of RAM to work. That's more than what most mid / high end XP OS based computers ran. My parents old thing only has 512 mbs of RAM and it still chugs along like a trooper 7 years later.
It was also the start of an overhaul that wouldn't be fully realized till Windows 7 and naturally no one likes buying into a work in progress.
1. UAC. Fucking UAC. You run a program that came built into Vista when you bought it and it says "Are you sure you want to run this program?" and says it's from Microsoft and has been digitally verified/signed/etc. Also, you can't turn it off. I once had it do that to me when I was changing my bloody display settings.
2. MEMORY. HOG. Vista takes up more RAM than most other operating system's I've used, and it's more noticeable.
3. Fucking nothing is compatible with it. Everything programmed for XP (or a lot of it, at least) had to be reprogrammed, adapted, emulated, or so on to work on Vista. At my dad's workplace they tried to switch over to Vista but found out that only the Office suite and a few other things (i.e. nothing they needed to perform day-to-day business tasks) were still compatible.
4. For a while (I think this was fixed in an update/service pack or something) if you had an open USB port or really any port, it would send power to it as if it had something plugged in. Massive waste of energy, especially if you had a laptop.
5. In my own personal experience, it was very unstable. It crashed all the time, and ultimately my computer refused to start up again. Then I managed to get it to boot long enough to initiate an upgrade to Windows 7. Suddenly, my computer worked again.
2. MEMORY. HOG. Vista takes up more RAM than most other operating system's I've used, and it's more noticeable.
3. Fucking nothing is compatible with it. Everything programmed for XP (or a lot of it, at least) had to be reprogrammed, adapted, emulated, or so on to work on Vista. At my dad's workplace they tried to switch over to Vista but found out that only the Office suite and a few other things (i.e. nothing they needed to perform day-to-day business tasks) were still compatible.
4. For a while (I think this was fixed in an update/service pack or something) if you had an open USB port or really any port, it would send power to it as if it had something plugged in. Massive waste of energy, especially if you had a laptop.
5. In my own personal experience, it was very unstable. It crashed all the time, and ultimately my computer refused to start up again. Then I managed to get it to boot long enough to initiate an upgrade to Windows 7. Suddenly, my computer worked again.
I did try 7. My uncle friend loaned me his comp for a few days so i could try it.Soylent Bacon said:
I was, sadly, not impressed. Its nothing that i need. And even more so, nothing that i want.
I like my vista. It feels smooth. And responsive. Any problems with it, were something that i caused.
Besides. Its not all about the OS. I feel its more what you hook up to it. If your hardwear is up to date or better, your computer can handle anything.