Vista rip-off

It's not unreasonable to expect a higher demand on resources from newer apps or operating systems, as long as you're getting some kind of improved performance or functionality in return. Windows OSs have steadily been becoming more demanding on the hardware but the user isn't getting to use much of it. It's hard to justify new hardware just for the eye candy.
Rick

 

The only hardware upgrade I did was memory as I stated before as I did when I upgraded to XP long ago. So I do not see the imagined greatly amount of expense involved. In retrospect, I paid more upgrading to XP because I also had to upgrade my sound card.

There are many new enhancements in Vista but the one that sold me was security (which we are all here for). At last you can run as a standard/limited user daily without having to log out and into an admin account and back again. Whenever an elevated privilege is needed all I have to do is type the admin password and move on.

Even Linux users understand this--for them running root (admin) all the time is verboten. Because everyone is running admin all the time is the reason forums such as this exists (if you can see it in that light).

As far as Chris Prillo is concerned, I have never been a fan of his even back in the ZDTV days (oh how I miss that cable channel). I don't know what it is but the feeling I get from him is akin to nails going across a chalkboard, lol. I am also familiar with the "incident" being referred to as it was posted in Neowin some time back. I, too, at first had problems with my HP1510 and also my Nokia PC Suite. Did I stomp my feet and cry and put my frustrations into a blog for the world to see? No, I just waited a couple of months (in March) in which these hardware companies came out with Vista compatible software and then I was back to the functionality I had with XP. I guess this has to do with the "got to have it now" generation. As I recall, I had went through similar experiences back in 2001 waiting on companies to put out XP upgrades of their software.

Except for a longer boot time, everything runs the same if not better than XP in Vista. I had no bigger expectations; to be frank I thought it would be a kludge on my older machine. I was surprised it runs as good as it does.

Instead of installing drivers out of a pile of CD's I only had to install the video (hardly anyone runs WDDM drivers) and sound because Vista recognized everything else. It did not recognize my Intel 567EP modem but it did ask me would I like for it to find drivers online and install it for me (as part of it's Problem Solver enhancement). I appreciated the gesture though I don't use the modem, lol.

But in the end I guess Open Source doesn't mean Open Minded. I know not all Linux users are like this as some of them are actually embarrassed by BadVista.org for instance. Use whatever OS you like, just don't spread FUD around about the other.

 

I just installed Vista Home Premium and the only thing I had to do was download an audio driver update online. Took all of maybe three minutes. There was no expense involved at all since I got the Vista full retail from MS for beta testing. All of the software I ran on XP runs great on Vista no incompatabilities yet.

{edit} Diskeeper light free wouldn't run but that was no loss.

 

All I got for being a Whistler (XP) beta tester was a thank you card from Bill with his smiling visage on it

Enjoy your new Vista

 

yeah i agree with midway40.. besides cant all stay on 512ram for yrs , gotta move with the times or in 2yrs look like your running 98 ! MD

 

So much for VistaCrapsta.
I'm not the know-it-all that will tell you how much Vista sucks and why one should not use it. In all likelyhood, when everything is optimized for vista (games, applications, hacks and cracks that make it more bareable), it would be the go-to junk. But seriously, it makes so little sense to use it at this point. Stick with a mature XP which has a plethora of apps designed to do everything Vista can do and much more. Don't switch!!!!

Vista IS a ripoff

 

Sorry to hear you bailed on Linux.
The version I'm currently using on my laptop is SimplyMEPIS 6.5. While it's not the "newest" Debian-based flavor out there, I chose it because everything works on my older laptop's hardware with 512mb RAM and 1.6 Ghz processor, and is faster than XP (I dual-boot using Grub), even with Beryl enabled. Plus being the "next-down" version, it's STABLE. No small factor is also their user Forum, which is extremely responsive and helpful. I also like the way most current versions of Linux (in general) are getting *much* better at hardware detection and finding/providing driver packages.
I'm sorry if my earlier post appeared I was spreading FUD about Vista, but I only stated facts as I experienced them. If Vista works for you, then great. Usability and functionality are my prime concerns, not to mention cost factor. While it's intriguing for me to try the newest OSes out there, my experience with Microsoft OSes are that they are not ready for prime time until a Service Pack (or two) get released - and for Microsoft to publicly state soon after Vista's launch that they will already be releasing a Service Pack within "x" amount of time confirms my opinion that's really just a glorified beta, or RC at best. YMMV.
All factors and options considered, Vista *is* a ripoff.

 

Hello,

I don't see why we should move to new hardware all the time. Most people only do emails and a bit of documents. These people do not need anything more than P2 with Win 95 on it.

If you're a gamer then ok, but for productivity, a bit of normal day to day stuff, no one needs to have to buy a nuclear power station just to run Solitaire.

Vista is a joke especially in light of this. The fact they could not or would not make a new normal operating system that does not eat a whole new order of magnitude of resources ...

Open Source people are open-minded - but if you call natural resistance to corporate bullshit FUD well then ...

Mrk

 

FWIW:
http://www.scotsnewsletter.com/88.htm#winreport
Gone to MAC !!

Of course this could go on and on for ever, ..but, there really do seem to be lots of issues around....
I dont doubt I'll be on Vista some time .... but not yet

 

most of the software i run is vista compatible.
anyway the secuirty in vista isnt much better than in Xp.
MS should of put the secuirity features in to XP SP3 and not have to pay hundreds of £££ or $$$
its still not proper user account control.
and its causing problems with installing software,
sometimes you have to rightclick the .exe file to run it as admin.
people have had problems running on demand scans with nod32 due to vista and new security rights.
so for my next pc i might just get XP home again.
also i dont know if some of the simple puzzle games i play work on vista or not.
MS market desktop search like its new.
even MS made desktop search for XP a few years ago now.
the good thing in vista is that windows update is a seprate program finaly!
so you can scrap IE7 completely if you wish.
lodore

 

I will say this and then I am through with this thread.

To turn XP into Vista via a SP would require a major overhaul of the kernel as the kernel in Vista is different ("locked-down" as they put it) plus other differences such as the DirectSound HAL that doesn't exist anymore. Also I read that 90% of the code was rewritten. Such an overhaul will result in a new OS anyway so what's the difference?

My posts on the OS FUD spreading was not directed to anyone here in particular but in general. It is something that has been sticking in my craw for a while now after observations from different forums. I have lived on both sides of the fence, so to speak. I have also defended Linux against FUD directed toward it in the past but this is very infrequent. The FUD spreading directed at the two OS's are becoming more disproportional by the month with MS getting the bad end of the stick. Also notice that there no BadLinux.org or variation thereof.

 

i was a bit crazy when i typed the post above.
oem Xp home costs £50 and OEM vista home premium costs £75
it isnt much difference in cost since vista has quite alot of more features bulti in.
but if your someone who replaces everyone microsoft then stay with XP since why pay for the extra stuff in vista if you not gonna use it.
so if you get a new pc you should work out if its worth paying that little bit extra for vista.
but it does seem the power state modes do work better when i read about some of the stuff in vista.
lodore

 

Hello,
It's a 50% difference for an OS that demands 100% more resources and 1,000% more space for EXACTLY the same results. Sounds like a bargain ... NOT.
Mrk

 

i do agree with you.
windows XP is a very stable OS and works fine.
so why do we need vista?
we dont really.
i know that all the software i use atm works fine on XP so why should i hunt around for compatible software and drivers then buy vista?
IMO a pc should last at least 3-4 years before needed a new pc because of higher demands by software.
in the same light i refuse to use Adobe Adobe Reader since its to bloated IMO.
so i replaced it with the very light foxitreader.
some people have powerful dual core and quad core processers.
and lots of ram.
but they didnt buy them to waste them on a bloated OS.
they brought them so they could run all the software they want for a long time to come.
lodore

 

I played around with Vista RCs and found it installed with 400mb ram with one warning. Then MS sent me Ultimate and I installed it on a 512mb ram machine, worked fine for me and I'm using 2-4gig ram normally.

 

Even with it's re-written code, Vista sure smells like a deja-vu experience of NT 4.0 all over again (remember *that* hype?), since all the same things were said about NT. As for its "security", Vista's been pwn3d already and the warez/crack/p2p/blog sites are having a field day.
I just don't see the benefit of an OS that demands so much and returns so little when there are other options. As for the Vista-bashing, most of it comes from frustrated users who tried it and said "no thanks". If I do decide to spend money on an OS, it will be OS X Leopard, if and when Parallels gets up to speed with DX9.

 

Geekster=Linux Distro
Gamer=WinXP
Rich Gamer=Vista
Everybody Else=Whatever comes on the computer they buy

Me=WinXP until Linux gets better game support

 

This is the (possibly) sad but inevitable truth... Vista is the future whether anyone likes it or not.

I run Linux on this older 1 gig cpu with 512mb ram because I have a choice and can. Suits my needs well and I prefer Linux for various reasons.

But for 99.9% of the folks buying a new PC, Vista is it..

 

This is interesting:
From PK:
http://www.spybot.info/en/news/2007-06-11.html

and a very interesting set of blog entries from Allchin and Russinovich linked at the bottom of the page

Heh: Allchin's is a bit more readable.

Just keep telling me how Vista is more secure. ?

Evebn if you dont have Vista you will end up with more services running see the thread here: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=176697

 

A bit old but: Windows Vista no more secure than XP: report