OS bashing

[Scrythe]

Vista is a decent OS if you can afford large amounts of RAM. I have 64-bit Vista with 8gb of RAM, so my only real problem is that nobody supports 64-bit systems.

There's going to be a whole new spin on the Windows/Mac/Linux/FreeBSD war when Google's OS comes out.

 

[TerribleTerryTate]

I just find XP much more simple. Both for networking, and for gaming. I put Vista on my system, and had crash after crash with games. I went back to XP, everything completely worked. Last time I ever tried using Vista.

 

[historybuff]

I was happy with XP, so I never had any desire to get Vista. Couldn't afford to anyway.

 

[Danny Ocean]

@#$@#@#$ @#$##@ #@#$# @#$#@ER #@#$#@ @#$@#$@# VISTA @#$@#$@#$@# #@#$## MOTHER @#$@#$@# @#$@#$@ @# I HATE YOU AND I WANT TO REMOVE YOU FROM MY COMPUTER AS WOULD I A MALIGN TUMOR IN MY BRAIN WITH THE SHARP END OF A TUNING FORK

A tuning fork has no sharp ends.

Vista has worked fine for me, in face, it has been significantly more stable that XP ever was. XP would almost crash daily, on this same rig Vista has never bluescreened in over a year of constant use. I love the new start menu, too, so useful.

 

[iggyus]

@#$@#@#$ @#$##@ #@#$# @#$#@ER #@#$#@ @#$@#$@# VISTA @#$@#$@#$@# #@#$## MOTHER @#$@#$@# @#$@#$@ @# I HATE YOU AND I WANT TO REMOVE YOU FROM MY COMPUTER AS WOULD I A MALIGN TUMOR IN MY BRAIN WITH THE SHARP END OF A TUNING FORK

A tuning fork has no sharp ends.

Vista has worked fine for me, in face, it has been significantly more stable that XP ever was. XP would almost crash daily, on this same rig Vista has never bluescreened in over a year of constant use. I love the new start menu, too, so useful.

Ah the good old bluescreens. I used to get them daily with XP, then installed Vista and they suddenly stopped

 

[Tegual]

After turning off Aero and UAC i was quite happy with vista. I also found that some games that wouldn't run on XP worked under vista, though i think that had to do more with the fact the my version of xp refused to work properly. I have found vista more stable and after turning the interface to the old version (I HAaTE vista's taskbar) it worked great even on my old AMD64 which the family use after i got a new computer. The biggest problem i've had is networking, i mean neither my ps3 or xbox360 will interface with vista for more than a few minutes at a time to i just gave up.

 

[Kriptonite]

I just stick with XP. I don't see why anyone would bash an Operating System, anything that is different will be(prepare to be shocked) different*gasp!*. If you want the same thing you have, keep what you have. Bashing any OS is pretty retarded and just a waste of precious time that could be spent watching professional bowling.

 

[Bigeyez]

50 million "Are you sure" pop-up warnings happen anytime you tried to do anything. Vista didn't have drivers for a large amount of my crap when it first came out. And it chewing up an insane amount of RAM are my primary reasons for hating it.

Now with drivers to support it and ways to turn off all the annoying crap Vista isn't bad. Still eats through RAM though. I still use XP over Vista though.

 

[911 fox]

vista has problems for example i was trying to rename a file folder but for some reason it would not let me (could be because i downloaded the file) even though i had full admin privileges. also it wont let me save in certain places. plus asking me if i want to allow things that i have allowed a thousand times before is annoying especially when playing games

 

[cleverlymadeup]

it is a resource hog and had piss poor memory management

Interesting only people who do not know what the hell they are talking about say the above statement?

actually i DO know what i'm talking about, look at the memory footprint of linux running kde or gnome or compiz with all the bells and whistles turned on and then compare it to the memory footprint of windows. linux will always have a lower one no matter what

the fact that windows ALWAYS needs to use the pagefile and if you have enough ram linux will NEVER touch the swap file.

windows is can very easily become lagged out and non-repsonsive, especially when starting up. linux on the other hand, once you see the cursor you have control of the os and getting it to become non-responsive with runaway apps taking up memory is VERY hard

so yeah dealing with large servers and many users on a network happens to know what the hell i'm talking about

Depends how you define better - some would say better = easy to use.

yeah but trying to relearn everything with vista and not being able to do some very basic things, like muting a microphone from picking up the speakers and many other things, such as bad memory usage and running slower on faster computers is not a better

the thing is linux runs very good on all the pc's it's put on. you give it more ram and more cpu and it just runs a LOT smoother

if i need to spend almost a grand to get a new os run the same speed as my current one then it's not an improvement and frankly they've wasted billions of dollars that someone has done for free


btw linux isn't very hard to use at all, the gui looks like any other one out there and has way cooler eye candy

 

[AbuFace]

We're talking about performance, and they say a picture is worth 1000 words, so...

Spoiler: A picture.

Note that W7 x64 is using 1 GB on its own without me running any applications. Why does it need to use so much memory by itself? I'm not against increasing system requirements, but a user needs to get something from those higher requirements. A game released in 2008 has higher requirements than one from 1998, but you can see the benefit in better graphics and a more complex game world.

What does W7/Vista do to justify such resource usage?

 

[Gitsnik]

Ok I'm going to put down the four reasons I hate vista (as an IT technician rather than a home gamer).

...

Resources: Because I really enjoy upgrading 200+ computers just so that the hardware can support them, and THEN upgrading the software.

...

7 looks good though, so far it's held up extremely well under all my tests, and I will probably be using it in the future.

While I understand that would be annoying, to be fair if I made a new operating system so long after the last one was released, I'd expect it to be running on newer hardware than they had also.

Oh don't get me wrong, I expected newer hardware to be necessary, but even my overpowered gaming rig needed upgrades to run Vista in the first place - there are limits to what you should expect of the people you are selling to, and it's shown: 7 is less of a resource hog, and despite canceling sales, XP continues to be a requested install.

 

[thiosk]

I am not a fan of, and do not enjoy, vista. Many of the reasons are that I simply really liked xp. But I use vista now, of course, 64 bit is a must, and I do not in any way enjoy it.

I will upgrade to windows 7 and never look back in due time.

Proof of the resource hoggyness of vista is the fact that most new netbooks and ultraportables run xp-- a small machine will run faster and smoother on xp than it will on vista.

 

[redsoxfantom]

The constantly asking whether or not you want to proceed gets very annoying but other than that vista works great.

I disabled that function in the control panel. That was my only real complaint with Vista since I had purchased a decent midrange computer so the resource consumption of Vista barely affects me at all. However, I am now running the Windows 7 RC, and I like it a lot more. I can see the speed difference between the two systems clearly, and its support for mouse gestures makes everything more convenient to use. I'll definitely upgrade when 7 comes out.

 

[Jaygee02]

Yeah most of our customers at work request XP in a new machine, even if they know nothing about computers. I was impressed with the speed of the Windows 7 beta also.

...

Depends how you define better - some would say better = easy to use.

...

if i need to spend almost a grand to get a new os run the same speed as my current one then it's not an improvement and frankly they've wasted billions of dollars that someone has done for free


btw linux isn't very hard to use at all, the gui looks like any other one out there and has way cooler eye candy

Yeah linux is easy if you know how, or you stick to the simple things, but say you give it to your mother and she wants to watch a movie. Almost every time I install linux on my machine the sound is broken, codecs aren't installed and video drivers need updating. Whilst I can take care of that with a bit of effort, the average user shouldn't be expected to have to touch the console, ever. Fiddling with yum or apt-get is, while quite powerful, going a bit past what I'd call easy to use.

 

[ShawnRiles]

Well, I stuck with XP.

I thought screw it, I don't need a new OS, I like XP.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

I'd gladly trade my resources for stability. I have never once had a problem with Vista itself. I'm told it's because it has many failsafes that keep it from crashing. Believe you me, I've had to suffer through a Pentium II with Windows 98. That shit was unbearable, constantly collapsing in on itself.

Vista is the most stable platform I've ever utilized, much more so than Windows XP. I wouldn't take any other OS over it.

 

[Danzaivar]

it is a resource hog and had piss poor memory management

Interesting only people who do not know what the hell they are talking about say the above statement?

http://www.yougamers.com/news/11446_world_in_conflict_final_system_requirements/images/wic-requirements/

"Recommended System Requirements:

...RAM: 1024MB (1.5GB for Windows Vista)..."

You, Darkness62, are an idiot for making a blanket statement with no justification. Especially one that's blatantly false. If needing an extra 500MB of RAM for a game, simply because of the OS you use, isn't a sign of a resource hog then I don't know what is.

On topic - What bugs me is I'm kind of the IT guy for my family and some friends, and I got annoyed of telling people over and over that Vista is technically better, but you need a fast computer to run it. Follow this with a 5 minute rant about how if it's better why can't slow computers run it yada yada yada.

I got 4GB of RAM so it's fine for my use mind.

 

[johnman]

I dislike Vista, the computers we get in at work to fix with it on are always a pain as you get "Are you sure?" boxes for frigging everything. Its a RAM hog, and the only problem with XP is lack of DX 10 and the limited amount of RAM you can use.