loving my new Vista

[djohn]

I told my self I will never go with windows again after over ten yrs of use.Just a few days ago I went to purchase a new macbook with a 2.2 intel core 2 duo 120g hard 1g ram and a super drive for a healthy price tag of 1299.00. After spending about hour playing with the mac and asking a bunch of questions I was sold. just as the sales guy went to get one for me and I glanced over to see a HP lap special edition in white and silver tone with a 1.66 intel core 2 duo 250 g hard drive 3 gigs of ram DVD burner with light scribe and built in cam 14.1 HD screen, blue tooth, media card reader, Vista Home premium and some usefull generous software.price tag of 1099.00 Sale for 949.00 with a 50.00 mail in rebate.Needless to say still using windows but loving it so far and for nearly 400.00 less I am very happy with vista.;D

[bigc73542]

;D :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
I also like Vista

[markymoo]

just think of the extra performance if you was running XP. 2x faster.

[TOMxEU]

Just think of the extra performance, if you were running Win95 or Win3.1. 4x-8x faster. ;)

[Huupi]

{QUOTE-> Just think of the extra performance, if you were running Win95 or Win3.1. 4x-8x faster. ;) <-QUOTE}



i have xp on all rigs,they do what i need,whats the deal to get Vista ?

Sure xp will fade into limbo but i have many years ahead to think about the switch.

[EASTER]

Well, i plan on completely skipping past Vista in wait for the next O/S star system, but you never know when you might just run across a deal to good to pass up. I look at it this way, i could always wipe it out and reinstall XP, but likely would just settle for dual systeming with XP "IF" i take a whack at vista.

[aigle]

If I am in ur place, I would have choosen MacBook.

I have a windos notebook already with XP. I hope to use it for years by Gods, wish. I will prefer to buy OSX now whenever I buy another desktop/ notebook.

[Huupi]

{QUOTE-> If I am in ur place, I would have choosen MacBook.

I have a windos notebook already with XP. I hope to use it for years by Gods, wish. I will prefer to buy OSX now whenever I buy another desktop/ notebook. <-QUOTE}

Depends, If your using expensive graphical software like me,only buying new OSX compatible software cost me much more then just the hardware change.

[aigle]

You are right. i use my PC maily for surfing and word/ power point etc. So no problems for me.

But in ur case I would have considered dual boot with Vista( BootCamp) or VM. Again cost is there. But i love the look n feel of Mac n OSX. Also no problems of security software.

[markymoo]

@TheTOM_SK (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/member.php?u=39251)

I just mentioned one benefit. I could fill a book with the rest.

I like to know why you think Vista is so great? Maybe its the constant alerts in your face left upto the user to decide what to do until you get totally sick of them you start to ignore them like the new user has shown to do and security takes a backseat. Maybe you was sold on the security. Well why is it people put there own firewall on?

djohn was in the shop and was sold on Vista. He hasn't told us why he never will go with windows again and was in the shop fixed on a Mac. He hasnt told us in detail why he was sold and happy on Vista. He described the hardware and the nice price tag and asked some questions and was sold. This tell us so little. Was it the eye candy and closer to a Mac but less price lol ? What convinced you in that short time that you couldn't do on XP?

Alot of features in Vista can be done by XP and better 3rd party applications already. The networking in Vista is better but it's totally new code and thats not good as it can take like 5 years to mature.

Why have so many professionals bashed Vista? Because there's nothing really worth upgrading for that can't be done on XP already plus a heavy downgrade of performance. Why did SP1 come out so fast? because it was faulty and they knew it. Lots of incompatibilities. One bloated big. Why suffer all that?

[sukarof]

I dont agree that there is "constant" popups in Vista UAC, I would say there are far more less popups than in a "younameit" HIPS for example. But I guess "constant" is a personal point of view that vary depending on who you ask.
And if you use it with SuRun (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1184094&postcount=64), there is even less popups. I have not tried it yet though coz I dont mind the few popups I get in Vista anyway .

Maybe I have some real futuristic computer but Vista is at least as fast as XP here, with all the bling bling on and after I installed all my software that I use. No downgrade in of performance at all. It was so in my old rig (AMD64x2 3800) too. If SP1 promises even faster, so much better.

But I agree that with the price today, it is not worth the money since XP is not outdated yet. But I just read today that MS is gonna drop the price with 40% world wide.
That shows that MS up to now lived in the past. They are on the right track, but personally I dont think it is worth more than 100 maybe, maybe 150 dollars. And thats for the Ultimate.


Game compability...well, not very impressed. Some wont run at all. even with xp compability.

[Paranoid2000]

{QUOTE-> Just think of the extra performance, if you were running Win95 or Win3.1. 4x-8x faster. ;) <-QUOTE}Unlikely - Win95 doesn't support multiple cores, has problems dealing with more than 512MB RAM and almost certainly wouldn't recognise much of the hardware on a current laptop. With Win3.1, you'd also lose DMA/UltraDMA on the disk interface, slowing file access by a factor of 4 or more.

[TOMxEU]

As mentioned, there are almost no UAC alerts and if they are, user can expect them and knows how to answer, before they even appear. MS is trying to persuade software developers to create aplications without admin access, because most of them do not really need it and by the way, UAC can be turn off. ;D
{QUOTE-> i have xp on all rigs,they do what i need,whats the deal to get Vista ? <-QUOTE}
None, if you are satisfied, you do not need to move to Vista. XP is rock solid OS proved by years, it will run just fine. Vistax64 is a good choice for a new PC.
{QUOTE-> Well why is it people put there own firewall on? <-QUOTE}
That is a good question, I do not understand it either, since most people can not use advanced firewall at all. Maybe because they disable UAC?! I used Vista a year without a firewall and other anti-junk and UAC paid off, though it is true, that this can be achieved with XP as well, but UAC is more user friendly.
{QUOTE-> Lots of incompatibilities. One bloated big. Why suffer all that? <-QUOTE}
I understand Linux fanatics, they just love to spam it everywhere, but I do not understand, why are people so upset by Vista, when no one tells them to use it, since XP will be supported till 2014 and Vista till 2012, what it is the problem? That they do not have hardware for it or that they do not like Microsoft?

But I agree, that Vista was released too soon, but that is just because MS needed money, pity, but that is the life. Well SP1 will be released on 11-th March. ;)

[trjam]

Personally I like Vista. After you tweak it to your taste it is damn good. I like the sidebar with gadgets. I have one gadget that basically is like MailWasher. It notifies me of emails, lets me delete them off the server before downloading. I have no issues with Vista.

[Judge Dee]

I too like Vista.
After using a rather low-end desktop with XP, my comparatively high-end laptop with Vista obviously runs faster. So because of my previous computer, I can't complain.
And I must admit, I prefer the look, even without Aero (How's
that for a technical reason to prefer something!:) ).
I've had no issues at all - yet.

[dbknox]

{QUOTE-> Personally I like Vista. After you tweak it to your taste it is damn good. I like the sidebar with gadgets. I have one gadget that basically is like MailWasher. It notifies me of emails, lets me delete them off the server before downloading. I have no issues with Vista. <-QUOTE}
I am with you here. I had to tweak win 95, win 98 win xp to my liking and I now have my Vista tweaked to where I am actually loving it! I would not have updated to Vista, but It came with my new computer.

[ASpace]

{QUOTE-> I am very happy with vista.;D <-QUOTE}

Welcome to the club of newbies about Vista! Great OS! :thumb:

[Trooper]

Glad that you are liking Vista. I have not had any problems or complaints of yet (knock on wood). I am running the 32 bit Business edition without any issues. This is my main PC at home that is used from web surfing, MS Office, to gaming.

I plan to grab myself a copy of X64 Ultimate edition later this year. Main reason being is because I want to try out Bit Locker, as well as the ability to utilize 4 gigs of RAM.

[Ragzarok]

Hello,
Vista is supposed to be cut in half soonhttp://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206901018. An OEM can actually be had for $50 @ your local Microcenter. But still, I prefer the XP.

[djohn]

{QUOTE-> If I am in ur place, I would have choosen MacBook.

I have a windo notebook already with XP. I hope to use it for years by Gods, wish. I will prefer to buy OSX now whenever I buy another desktop/ notebook. <-QUOTE} Well like I said I was going to buy the macbook but the value and hardware In the Hp was to good to pass up and besides theres nothing that special about the macbook more then any other computer.The main reasons I choose a window pc again
1.value for the money
2.media card reader
3.light scribe
4.hard drive space
5.3 gigs of ram
6.software
7.less Money;D

[djohn]

{QUOTE-> Welcome to the club of newbies about Vista! Great OS! :thumb: <-QUOTE}
Hi HiTech_Boy thanks for the newbie vista welcome and I agree its great OS so far

[markymoo]

maybe its the better user friendliness. if you what you run on Vista is fast enough then that's fine. i just don't want to run the same software and take a performance hit just for added security features like UAC that i have turned off anyway ;D. if you want the security features then use the x64 as the startup programs are jostled around in memory harder to attack and illegal instruction calls cannot be used by software or nasty intent to change the kernel and as Trooper was saying can use full 4.gb not like just utilizing 3.2gb of it plus digitally signed drivers.

{QUOTE-> UAC can be turn off. ;D <-QUOTE}
lol yes turning it into XP.

{QUOTE-> But I agree, that Vista was released too soon, <-QUOTE}

yep thats the way it goes with one huge corporate but i'm glad i not forced into using it. the cost of Vista was ridiculous but have to pay all those wages.

i think they should just concentrated on good features and maximize performance thats what everybody wants. the best time to use it will be a few years from now when its settled down more and the hardware is even faster. like what you have now with XP. the hardware has caught up and overtaken the speed of XP so to speak. the security questions shouldn't be left upto to the user so much but decided by the o/s.

[markymoo]

Originally Posted by TheTOM_SK
Just think of the extra performance, if you were running Win95 or Win3.1. 4x-8x faster.

{QUOTE-> Unlikely - Win95 doesn't support multiple cores, has problems dealing with more than 512MB RAM and almost certainly wouldn't recognise much of the hardware on a current laptop. With Win3.1, you'd also lose DMA/UltraDMA on the disk interface, slowing file access by a factor of 4 or more. <-QUOTE}

very funny

[TOMxEU]

{QUOTE-> if you want the security features then use the x64 as the startup programs are jostled around in memory harder to attack and illegal instruction calls cannot be used by software or nasty intent to change the kernel ... plus digitally signed drivers. <-QUOTE}
Yeah, Vistax64 is the best, that is why I bought it along with 8 GB RAM, si it would run just fine, I am just waiting for the rest of the PC to be delivered. :'(
{QUOTE-> i think they should just concentrated on good features and maximize perfornance thats what everybody wants. <-QUOTE}
No argue with that, but MS is known NOT to listen to customers, from whatever reason?! :doubt:
{QUOTE-> i think they should just concentrated on good features the security questions shouldn't be left upto to the user so much but decided by the o/s. <-QUOTE}
Well, that is a tough one, it is true, that users should not have control over PC, since they barely understand it, but they are those, who infects PC in the first place. Windows Firewall is already an ingenius idea, so in comparison to it UAC might look like a step backward, but who knows. MS set SP1 to limit UAC a bit, but I guess, that most people will disable it anyway. It is only up to developers to do something about it, MS just showed them the door, they have to go through it.

[midway40]

Loving my Vista here as well :) Sometimes I think that the malware writers were the ones who started all the rumors about Vista at the beginning so their job wouldn't get harder. Now since Vista is gaining momentum they are encouraging the use of turning off UAC, their biggest enemy.

Those who proclaim that you need a high end machine to run Vista should look at this (http://digg.com/hardware/Windows_Vista_on_a_500_mhz_Dell).

After working on XP machines all day at work, I can't wait to get home to my Vista! ;D

[strangequark]

yep count me as a Vista groupie as well, would find it very difficult to go back to XP

[ThunderZ]

Something (http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36279/118/) for your reading edification. I am making no statements pro or con concerning Vista. (although I do have my opinions of course) ;)
I am curious though. How many Vista users here are using it in its` 100% out of the box configuration.....the way I am pretty sure the majority of Vista users are? ::)

I had another 2+ paragraphs typed here but edited it myself for a multitude of reasons. :-X

[aigle]

{QUOTE-> Wifes: <-QUOTE}How many wifes ( wives) do u have BTW?:P

[ThunderZ]

{QUOTE-> How many wifes ( wives) do u have BTW?:P <-QUOTE}


LOL......my spelling stands corrected. ;D

[aigle]

Nope, may be still not i think. Mrs` should be!( not sure though).

[ThunderZ]

{QUOTE-> Nope, may be still not i think. Mrs` should be!( not sure though). <-QUOTE}


:doubt: That makes 2 of us. Oh...and to answer your original question, I only have one wife. Since she got into PCs I can only afford just one. ;D

[djohn]

{QUOTE-> Something (http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36279/118/) for your reading edification. I am making no statements pro or con concerning Vista. (although I do have my opinions of course) ;)
I am curious though. How many Vista users here are using it in its` 100% out of the box configuration.....the way I am pretty sure the majority of Vista users are? ::)

I had another 2+ paragraphs typed here but edited it myself for a multitude of reasons. :-X <-QUOTE}
Hi thunderZ other then adding firefox and thunderbird and my own security apps everything else Is as factory configured and runs perfect at this point. I don't think to many here would leave as Is. most of us here have are own favorite apps

[ThunderZ]

Agreed djohn. But most Members\readers of this Forum are also aware of auto-runs, installed programs adding themselves at start up etc. They tend to keep things a bit leaner and cleaner. If a program causes their machine to lag they look for a cure or alternative. The average users are not aware of these. When you take into account the resources already required by Vista, even Basic, they will considerably impact the performance of the machine. Even today it seems that the "basic" store bought computer comes with only 512 of RAM. While Vista may run fine on 512, that is about it without taking a noticeable performance hit if not out right lock ups.

[djohn]

{QUOTE-> Agreed djohn. But most Members\readers of this Forum are also aware of auto-runs, installed programs adding themselves at start up etc. They tend to keep things a bit leaner and cleaner. If a program causes their machine to lag they look for a cure or alternative. The average users are not aware of these. When you take into account the resources already required by Vista, even Basic, they will considerably impact the performance of the machine. Even today it seems that the "basic" store bought computer comes with only 512 of RAM. While Vista may run fine on 512, that is about it without taking a noticeable performance hit if not out right lock ups. <-QUOTE} I agree:thumb:

[EASTER]

The appeal when ANYTHING brand new is released including O/S p0wed by $M will always be too great to resist for most, it's the ageless classic lure of the FASCINATION for anything which is acclaimed as a better successor to it's former predecessor syndrome ;D

[manOFpeace]

I have had my Vista laptop for about 6 months now. Still not completely comfortable with it. On saying that I use XP as my main computer which is probably the reason on the slow progress with Vista.

But I think I will get to like it as much as XP eventually. I don't have a problem with pop-ups. At this time I would score it a careful 8/10.

[markymoo]

http://wastingtimewithmikeandari.wordpress.com/2008/02/09/windows-server-2008-10-faster-and-uses-23-the-ram-of-vista/

:P

[The Hammer]

{QUOTE-> http://wastingtimewithmikeandari.wordpress.com/2008/02/09/windows-server-2008-10-faster-and-uses-23-the-ram-of-vista/

:P <-QUOTE}Interesting read markymoo. Thanks.

[appster]

{QUOTE-> http://wastingtimewithmikeandari.wordpress.com/2008/02/09/windows-server-2008-10-faster-and-uses-23-the-ram-of-vista/

:P <-QUOTE}
One big drawback of using a server OS [e.g., WS2K8] as a workstation OS is that a number of valuable workstation apps/utilities will refuse to install on them! :-\

Getting back to Vista, other than its 'eye-candy' (themes, gadgets, etc), what does it do that XP doesn't? - except 'eat' lots more resources! ;)

[ThunderZ]

{QUOTE-> One big drawback of using WS2008, or for that matter WS2003, as a workstation OS is that a number of valuable workstation apps/utilities refuse to install on them! :-\ <-QUOTE}


Very true. Many security apps. among them. Or at the very least will not function correctly. Also, many free apps. are no longer free because a server based OS is not considered for home use and therefor violates the EULA.

This was my experience for the brief time I ran WS 03 on a spare machine for classes I was taking a while back.

[lucas1985]

{QUOTE-> Getting back to Vista, other than its 'eye-candy' (themes, side-bar, etc), what does it do that XP doesn't? - except 'eat' lots more resources! ;) <-QUOTE}
Advantages of Vista:
- Better security "out of the box" (ASLR, "standard" user account, IE7, etc). With the exception of ASLR, you can have the same (or better) security using the built-in tools and 3rd-party tools.
- System-wide instant search. Achievable in XP using 3rd-party tools.
- Revamped network stack. In practice, it does nothing.
- New audio stack, which runs in user-mode now. Not big deal if you have a soundcard with good drivers and don't need per-application volumen control, bass management, etc.
- DX10. Not big deal at this time, but important for gamers.
Disadvantages of Vista:
- Slower on all fronts: I/O, memory access, resource consumption, etc.
- DRM everywhere. An OS designed to meet the expectations of RIAA/MPAA and other user-friendly groups.
- Compatibility with older hardware.
- Compatibility with some software.

[markymoo]

@appster You could say the same thing about Vista software refusing to run. If you turn alot off in Vista it really becomes server but still not as fast.

Don't like the Search in Vista.

Talking of compatibility here's the Vista sidebar for XP. :shifty:

http://www.thoosje.com/sidebar.html

[nexstar]

I found myself in a situation recently which made me even more wary of Vista than I was already. I had a fairly new Sony Vaio laptop with Vista installed but the owner had started it up one day and it BSOD'd on them and would keep doing so. Any attempt to go into safe mode or any other boot option would result in the same BSOD (error code STOP: 0x0000C1F5).

I didn't think that this was a problem as there was a recovery partition (no reinstallation CD provided). I selected the recovery partition to boot into and promptly got the same BSOD. Feeling that the disk was obviously corrupt/faulty I used my own Vista CD thinking I could at least try to fix the boot issues. I was stunned when I got the same BSOD on booting with the CD :o .

I tried an XP CD and it booted up fine. BartPE booted up fine. The only things that failed were any recovery CD's based on VistaPE. Shadowprotect's boot CD failed but the 'legacy' environment booted ok.

This saga seems to show that Vista cannot necessarily recover from this sort of problem itself and you may have to resort to disk utilities running on some other OS. Potentially a problem as more utilities become VistaPE based.

Graham

[bigc73542]

{QUOTE-> Something (http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36279/118/) for your reading edification. I am making no statements pro or con concerning Vista. (although I do have my opinions of course) ;)
I am curious though. How many Vista users here are using it in its` 100% out of the box configuration.....the way I am pretty sure the majority of Vista users are? ::)

I had another 2+ paragraphs typed here but edited it myself for a multitude of reasons. :-X <-QUOTE}

I am useing it out of the box with max settings. Audio, Video, security and so on. Vista Firewall with extended security. Runs absolutly outstanding. :thumb:

[ThunderZ]

{QUOTE-> I am useing it out of the box with max settings. Audio, Video, security and so on. Vista Firewall with extended security. Runs absolutly outstanding. :thumb: <-QUOTE}


No other additional security apps.? No other additional software of any kind?

You have not trimmed the start menu or kept any add`d software from starting up with Windows?

[lodore]

im still not completely convinced with vista.
it still crashes quite alot and doesnt always shutdown properly.
im gonna do a fresh install once SP1 comes out later this month.
lodore

[bigc73542]

{QUOTE-> No other additional security apps.? No other additional software of any kind?

You have not trimmed the start menu or kept any add`d software from starting up with Windows? <-QUOTE}

I run NIS 2008
Spywareblaster 4.0
thunderbird mail, although I still have windows mail active.
I have not changed anything in start menu. It runs well enough I haven't had to make any changes. I just haven't had any problems with Vista Home Premium. Never had a crash or other problem. Except for a bit longer boot time, but not much more that the XP Pro that I replaced. Completly satisfied with Vista.

you can see my security in the screen shot

[ThunderZ]

{QUOTE-> I run NIS 2008
Spywareblaster 4.0
thunderbird mail, although I still have windows mail active.
I have not changed anything in start menu. It runs well enough I haven't had to make any changes. I just haven't had any problems with Vista Home Premium. Never had a crash or other problem. Except for a bit longer boot time, but not much more that the XP Pro that I replaced. Completly satisfied with Vista.

you can see my security in the screen shot <-QUOTE}


Glad your experience has been a good one. I will guess you are running 2 gigs of RAM and a dual-core(?) processor. ::) While this configuration is becoming more and more main stream, I do not believe it is your standard off-the-shelf PC. You had knowledge of what you wanted\were building for. More knowledge then the "average" user going to the local electronics store wanting to buy a PC with the latest greatest :doubt: offering by MS. The off-the-shelf "normal PC" (budget $$$) is still coming with 512 of RAM and a single core. This is what Ma & Pa buy expecting it to be blazing fast. They have no idea what a GHz is, FSB, do`t know 1 MB from 1 GB. They have no idea about "start-up" items. They do not have a clue about compatibility of software and\or conflicts. It is brand new and it is "just supposed to work". If you even mention an AV to them there answer is usually "Yea, I think there is one on there. :doubt: Then mention updates to them and watch the glazed look start to come across their eyes. :what: You do`t even want to bring up FWs` or HIPS. :blink:

These are the type of people Windows Vista is supposed to be designed for. Yet somehow I think they missed the mark. My .02 and I am sticking to it. ;)

[bigc73542]

Actually what my hardware setup is as seen in the screen shot. It is an AMD Semprom 64 3200+ single core.

[ThunderZ]

{QUOTE-> Actually what my hardware setup is as seen in the screen shot. It is an AMD Semprom 64 3200+ single core. <-QUOTE}


I stand corrected. :-X

[Rainwalker]

bigc.......where did you get the wallpaper...Stardock.....nice

[bigc73542]

If I remember right I got the WP here http://www.caedes.net/ under "abstract"