Why is Vista so terrible?

[Wyatt]

(standard "omg, whaaaaaaaaaaa.... Vista/MS badddddd" rant)

Please scroll up. If you read the thread, you might not look foolish for posting comments that have already been addressed.

your problem old pal is they HAVEN been addressed, you and others like you have just listed a bunch of excuses. im not posting anything that ISNT true, and everything ive said is based on personel experiance with it. you might not agree that the admin 'security features' are a pain in the ass but I think they are, you might not agree that the system is a RAM hog but I think it is, and finaly you may not agree that Vista is overblown junk that isnt worth the powder to blow it to hell but again I think it is.

you havent posted anything too 'address' my OPINION of vista since you CANT post anything that will change the way i feel about it. the only thing that can change the way i feel about it is for Microsoft too CHANGE it, not for web tards too make excuses for it.

and i never for one second said that Microsoft is bad, im one of the small group of people that actualy LIKE microsoft, i was totaly happy with XP, and i though 98 was fucking great as well, vista on the other hand is shit, and if nothing else the number of sales back that OPINION up. take out all the FORCED upgrades by new computer sales and it gets even more pronounced.

 

[The-Big-D]

I havent found many problems with it really.

But alot of people who havnt used Vista are making accusations they havnt actually seen for themselves. Just from word of mouth of other people.

There is a video somewhere on the internet of people from microsoft or something doing a survey with members of the public about Vista. People give alot of negative comments so microsoft decide to give them some "new software". In fact its just vista just with a differant box etc to trick them and everyone is really impressed with it. They soon realise and actually Vista.

 

[Baneat]

it's slow, it fucks with you, it has problems that seem to come out of nowhere, has no depth, uses a lot of HD space, lowers game FPS and just fucks with eveything it touches. They screwed up, that's pretty much it.

 

[solidstatemind]

Please, for the love of all that is holy, don't call me sparky. Sorry, it annoys me. Customers use to call me that.

I didn't claim to be an expert, and you shouldn't either. Unless you're a Microsoft tech, you're about as much of an expert as the rest of us are. I listed a whole bunch of reasons for my loathing of Vista, I'm perfectly justified in them. If you want a good debate about it, I'll gladly have one with you. On here, PM, IM. Whatever floats your boat

Sorry about the sparky thing: that's reflexive when I get annoyed.

I maintain what I said before: what I see here is a lot of people whining about how Vista doesn't work for them, or they don't care for the features, or in their opinion it uses too many resources. And therefore, it is 'broke' and Microsoft 'fucked up'.

You want to say it doesn't work for you, fine. You want to ***** about how MS is EoL'ing XP next year- Hey, I completely agree. You want to throw a tizzy because of the way Dell is actually trying to force people to pay a 'downgrade fee' to go from Vista to XP? Knock yourself out, that IS fucked up.

But don't say that it's a piece of shit. Why not? Because unfortunately, your perceptions do not define reality as a whole for everyone. I'm sorry, that's a huge pet peeve of mine. There are plenty of people out there who like it just fine, as it does what they want it to do (and well), but you'll never hear from them because satisfied customers don't say anything. But the complainers conveniently feel that silence means that they don't exist.

I'm sorry that your O/S isn't perfect for you, and that big, bad Microsoft actually made something for the mass market rather than for the smaller segment of hardcore gamers and PC enthusiasts. But to quote Denis Leary: Life sucks, get a fucking helmet.

I said it before, but I guess it bears repeating, even if people refuse to listen: Vista was not made for the Gamer or the Enthusiast. (I always thought that it was a bad idea to restrict DX10 to Vista only, but apparently that's a API or HAL change in Vista that requires it; I dunno, I'm a PM, not a dev.) But even then, you put a little work into researching it and apply some good tweaks (like your Hidden Admin trick), and you can definitely get it managable. Well, at least most people can.

And if you can't, well that ain't Microsoft's fault. Feel free to switch to a different operating system.

I'm not going to bother replying anymore to this thread. It's pretty clear that most people here (not including you) just want to complain rather than being constructive and that's not worth my time.

PS. Oktalist: it's not anectodal. Please reread exactly what I wrote and connect the dots. You appear to be an intelligent person, you should be able to figure it out. Also, unless you have loaded up a clean install of XP, applied only the mandatory security fixes, and then ran your program, and then did the same with Vista, you cannot authoritatively state that it is absolutely certain the program is failing because of the O/S, particularly when I guarantee you that someone out there can run it. There are very very few programs that absolutely will not ever run on Vista, that ran natively in XP. Programs that require emulators on XP don't count. Oh, and the bit about when you have a problem, and then another person has a problem, and then another... now, THAT is anecdotal.

 

[Mokinokaro]

The main problems with Vista are that computer retailers offer(ed) it on a lot of machines that barely met the specifications to run the OS.

The UAC issue really isn't Microsoft's fault. It was designed to increase security and the nag screens wouldn't occur if software had been built according to their new guidelines. Unfortunately, most developers were lazy and took a few years to catch up. You'll find a lot less UAC prompts (if you've got it turned on) with newer software.

Vista's main problem is that it could have used another year in the oven. Microsoft should have let hardware gain another year of power increases and optimized the OS more before release.

 

[Finbark]

It runs fine for me. Internet Explorer will often crash on me, but I use Firefox now. My main problem is not being able to handle files. It just completely doesn't let me edit most files. Mostly game files. I just like XP better. I wish I had it on my laptop...

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

People hate it for a handful of reason.

1) Other people hate it and hatred is a known airborne contaigen that is communicable among the stupid.

2) Vista looks different than Windows XP and people are only slighly less afraid of change than tney are death or public speaking.

3) Vista has substantially higher system requirements than it's predicessor. Early cheap computers loaded with Vista often barely met the requirements and as such tended to perform poorly.

4) Some piece of software or some device no longer functions in Vista.

Most people I have met that refuse to use Vista, when pressed fall into category 1 or 2. A few of my more technically adept friends have run into the last problem. There was nothing wrong with Vista per se, but I was irritated by a few issues shortly after launch (No SLI driver had been written for my particular video card set, which is a vendor problem not an OS problem).

 

[hopeneverdies]

It's a friggin computer, just like XP and Mac, get over it

 

[aaron552]

I don't hate Vista. I just find it annoying for several reasons: It *is* a memory hog. I have 2GB of RAM (a decent amount, considering I am running 32-bit) and it runs fine, even most games. It's when I exit games that I have problems, I have to wait 3-5 minutes before the desktop is useable again (due hard disk swapping so much). UAC is also a pain. It is solely responsible for a 900MB installer taking 10 minutes to start (5 minutes to start, UAC prompt, 5 minute wait for window to appear)

 

[megapenguinx]

I'm ok with it, it just hogs slightly more resources than XP so I need to upgrade my comp before I can fully enjoy it.

 

[Joeshie]

Because most people are retarded when it comes to technology. Yes, most people in this thread who are complaining about Vista probably A) haven't tried it or B) are pretty stupid when it comes to technology.

I've found that most problems with Vista (or any OS for that matter) are usually the fault of the user, rather than the OS. But, being the stupid humans that we are, we have the need to blame something other than ourselves when a problem arises. I mean, it was TOTALLY Microsoft's fault that you clicked that e-mail that you had no idea who it was from and got a virus.

Also, I'm a Vista Business user since Vista was released that has had far fewer problems with Vista than with XP.

 

[reggiejames]

The main problems with Vista are that computer retailers offer(ed) it on a lot of machines that barely met the specifications to run the OS.

The UAC issue really isn't Microsoft's fault. It was designed to increase security and the nag screens wouldn't occur if software had been built according to their new guidelines. Unfortunately, most developers were lazy and took a few years to catch up. You'll find a lot less UAC prompts (if you've got it turned on) with newer software.

Vista's main problem is that it could have used another year in the oven. Microsoft should have let hardware gain another year of power increases and optimized the OS more before release.

i think you are right! most computer manufacturers had large inventory of machines geared towards xp when vista became available. it would have been too expensive to rebuild them all, so they installed vista and hoped for the best. but i could be completely wrong.

 

[Wyatt]

Because most people are retarded when it comes to technology. Yes, most people in this thread who are complaining about Vista probably A) haven't tried it or B) are pretty stupid when it comes to technology.

I've found that most problems with Vista (or any OS for that matter) are usually the fault of the user, rather than the OS. But, being the stupid humans that we are, we have the need to blame something other than ourselves when a problem arises. I mean, it was TOTALLY Microsoft's fault that you clicked that e-mail that you had no idea who it was from and got a virus.

Also, I'm a Vista Business user since Vista was released that has had far fewer problems with Vista than with XP.

why would you say retarded? id oput myself at about average and i DONT like it, ive got some friends that are very much more intelligent than i am that dont like it, ive got some friends and family that are all but hopelessly lost that totaly HATE it. its not a 'retarded' thing since the bitching from what i see comes from the whole spectrum of users.

i can totaly agree that some of the issues with Vista may be hardware related, some of the software issues may or may not be MS fault, but that doesnt change the fact that the end user is stuck with the OS that HAS these issues no matter who is to blame. and since the 'issue' is OS related than MS gets the blame simply becauses its THEIR OS.

it would be like Ford building a truck chassis that requires 12 tires and 3 motors and then turning around and pointing fingers at the tire companys or the engine makers and saying its THEIR fault that the truck is a fucking mess. MS decided to make all these changes in Vista its THEIR responcability to make sure that those changes are going too be both welcome and actualy work right the first time out of the box. the end users , you know, those people who actualy spend their CASH to buy the product shouldnt be stuck with a fucking mess and then have to wade through all the finger pointing and blame game, all the while being STILL stuck with a fucking mess of an OS.

alot of the arguments ive read in this thread (and many others like it) are valid on the pro vista side. im SURE that hardware issues provoked an bad impression at first blush, in fact i KNOW it did since my own mother bought a bottomish end PC early on in the cycle that had Vista on it and it all but crushed her performance. i on the other hand was forced to buy Vista because i purchased a somewhat more upscale 'gaming' rig and dont have nearly the performance issues that she had on her's. of corse i have a whole NEW batch of issues all my own and that IS the point. i jumped 2 generations forward on the hardware side just to get the same level of performance from my Vista Rig as i did my old XP rig that is 2 generatiosn harware behind it. for NO real improvment in quality of the games. and if anything older games run worse.

now say what you will about how 'us gamers' arent the market for Vista, ill just say to you that you NEED a 'gammer rig' to get the full range of performace out of Vista wether or not you play games at all, and when you look at mom & pop buying their craptastic dell for $400 on sale and get that machine with vista shoe horned into a hardware spec that would have issues keeping up with 98 than how can you possable still defend Vista too THOSE customers who DONT know shit about computers? if Vista was designed to expand into the 'mass market' than making it so the fucking thing only works ok on TOP END hardware is NOT the way to do it. WII didnt decide to build $1000 consoles to play casual games on did they? why in the WORLD would microsoft think that making an OS that only works OK on top end machines be a good idea to expand into the 'casual' PC users market?

as i said one before i LIKE microsoft products for the most part. if for no other reason than they ARE a monopoly. MY computer will work with the other 95% of the computers out there with very little fuss or bother. thats a selling point for me, im not one of those 'rebels' that go on and on an on an on an on an on about linux or firefox or MAC or any of the other alternatives to plane old basic black of Microsoft. in fact ill be looking forward to the next OS from microsoft with the expectation that they learned from the mistakes of Vista and will improve it 100%.

but no matter how much you try and argue or call people 'retarded' Vista is a flop. i feel this from my own first hand experiance with it. most (dare i say ALL) of the people i know in the real world if they dont flat out hate it, atleast dont LIKE it. they are just dealing with it untill the next version comes along. ALL the people i know and myself included might be 'retarded' but its us 'retards' that keep microsoft in business and with that being true than you, ohh giant pile of braines that you, are better hope that MS gets the next one retard proof otherwise you and the other 12 people on the planet with your huge brains that liked Vista are gunna be paying about $300,000,000 a copy for your next OS upgrade just to keep MS in business.

 

[deora2dude]

where to begin? first off, its much worse then windows XP "are you shure you want to do what you just told me you want to do?" pops up often enough, that and the fact that you need at least a gig of RAM just to run it, let alone make it think, add that to the fact that the compatability issues are just absurd (although it can be mended, most people wont have a clue as to how to do that) its sluggish and slow, all it brings to the table is balenced by everything else it brought (EG intuitive OS navagation, countered by the fact that to even glance at a file not on your desktop it whines and complains constantly) that and the fact that being a GAMES and VIDEO PC you need to install every little patch or converter just to get the simplist of things to work

ou know, all the problems you have with it could be addressed by:
1) turning of the UAC (in account management) - that'll get rid of the confirmation messages (though if you're too retarded to work that out yourself then perhaps you need the computer to hold your hand when you run programs) and
2) upgrading to service pack 1 (as the OS is no doubt prompting you), tried and tested to be superior to XP at the vast majority of tasks on a medium spec computer, including gaming. Now that everybody has produced Vista-compatible drivers pretty much everything currently works fine, unlike at its rather abysmal launch.

Oh, and as to RAM usage - you only have 2Gb, I presume? If you're running the os on minimum specs, then you can only expect that there's going to be performance issues, just like with any other program -_-U. 4Gb should be standard for Vista, and dont forget that unlike XP there's not a realistic limit on the amount of RAM the system will use - as I understand it, Vista will use 8Gb of RAM whilst XP is limited to just 4 - though I could be wrong on the exact numbers.

Rants like yours are pathetic and ill-informed, and all the needless Vista-hate is why the new Windows 7 sounds NOTHING LIKE IT - any similarity would only attract further puerile hatred. Even though it is, essentially, optimised Vista with some new funky features. I can say from my experience with the Beta that 7 works like a CHARM - it even automatically downloaded ALL the correct drivers for all my hardware as part of the install procedure, and I've got a Wacom tablet and Razer mouse, as well as a 24 inch monitor - all worked instantly and completely. Such a nice experience compared to XP. Plus it's lighter on resources than Vista!

how can i be ignorant if im drawing from personal opionions? this is what i thought of vista. and when you were whining about the RAM and stuff you were just supporting my thoughts. and yeah i did find the UAC toggle, but i dont think the average person would. and that was written WAY befor the 7 beta. though i havent got around to getting it it sounds much better then vista.so could you turn off your ego shields and find a place in your clotted heart to listen to other peoples opionions? the universe does not revolve around your massive ass. so please stop flaming and try going out that door

 

[sirdanrhodes]

Two words, resource hog.

 

[jasoncyrus]

I've got Vista and it works perfectly fine with me. The only thing I've had problems with is Protype and thats got bugs coming out its ass across all platforms, vista, xp, xbox, ps3, everything.

 

[Xorghul]

You can't play some old games because they run on DOS which Vista can't handle. And it's a *****.

 

[fenrizz]

I got Vista, and I think it works just fine.
Better than XP imo.
I think that it just became popular to hate on poor Vista, because all the cool kids did it.

 

[AdamAK]

You can't play some old games because they run on DOS which Vista can't handle. And it's a *****.

You can use DOSBox for that. Works like a charm.

I've had about as many problems with Vista as with XP: Almost none. It works like a charm on my Laptop and I don't see the point in switching back to XP. Have had no compatibility issues, even with games from <1996, and everything runs quite smoothly. Also, what's the point of having loads of RAM and other hardware when it's not used?

And for those complaining about the 'permission to run program X', you should just go to Control Panel and switch it off. It's called User Account Control, if I remember correctly and it only takes a second to turn it off if it really bothers you that much.

I would also like to add the the GUI looks a lot better than XP, in my humble opinion.