New OS

[Binary]

Really I just don't get why everybody hates vista, I have no problem and people should of no problems with it as well.

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by Binary

Really I just don't get why everybody hates vista, I have no problem and people should of no problems with it as well.

it depends on what you use it for.

if all you do is browse the web like an average user, you might not notice its problems.

but if you're a hardcore user/programmer/developer, you'll notice more of its flaws.

the top 5 things i hate about vista are...

1) sucky backwards compatibility, and problems with legacy I/O devices... such as parallel ports.
2) being asked a million questions in order to do anything.
3) its slower than XP
4) it dosn't trust the user!
5) it hard to find where certain options are; lots of stuff is hidden.

[DB7]

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

the top 5 things i hate about vista are...

1) sucky backwards compatibility, and problems with legacy I/O devices... such as parallel ports.

I don't have any parallel port devices (well I still have an old Epson printer but that died years ago, lord knows why I keep it really) but I don't find Vista to have poor compatibility for programs or old hardware. The sound card I bought for my second computer (which came with XP Home pre-sp1) to give it a gameport still works perfectly with Vista, although oddly the installation program for them was incompatible with Vista even though the drivers themselves work.

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

2) being asked a million questions in order to do anything.

It does do that straight out of the box but you can turn UAC off (which kind of defeats the purpose of it) or you can tweak it so it does not lock you out of the desktop when it wants to ask you a question (which makes it more OSX-like)

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

3) its slower than XP

As I've stated before in this thread, I simply don't find it to be any slower in running the games and apps that I use. Considering the dated nature of my hardware I find this to be odd, when others do on better hardware.

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

4) it dosn't trust the user!

Oddly enough I don't find this to be a bad thing, most people who get let loose on a computer shouldn't be trusted. They can also turn off the programs that don't trust them if they so please.

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

5) it hard to find where certain options are; lots of stuff is hidden.

This is about the only thing I wholly agree with you on, I get frustrated myself when using Vista and wanting to do something simple like change a few display options. XP had a simple tabbed interface to do the jobs, whereas Vista makes me go through several screens to change just one.

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by DB7

Oddly enough I don't find this to be a bad thing, most people who get let loose on a computer shouldn't be trusted. They can also turn off the programs that don't trust them if they so please.

when i buy an OS, i don't want to have to fight with it!
i want to have the freedom to do what i want with it.

its like all MS had in mind with vista is Security Security Security! And limiting what the user can do...

[Binary]

Well what i use it for is.

FTP (What pissed me off that the older ws_ftp did not work and had to upgrade but I got use to it)
Games (DX10 so nice)
Surf the net (Mozilla Firefox FTW)
Warez (Rapidshare, I hate torrents)
Messengers (yahoo, aim, msn, etc etc)
Emulators (Vista speeds up PS2 emu by 9 more faps unlike xp)


Really after SP1, I had no slow downs, I compare my 2 same spec pc, both load up xp and vista at the same time even if I installed junk on both of them. Vista shuts down faster then my tweak XP.

but anyways both XP and Vista are great for me. It's just going to take time to get the bugs work out. Remember when everybody hated xp when it first come out then 3 years later it was biggest success?

but anyways when windows 7 comes out, I going to get it so I can have MORE space. :P

[MiretanK]

Originally Posted by Binary

Well what i use it for is.

FTP (What pissed me off that the older ws_ftp did not work and had to upgrade but I got use to it)
Games (DX10 so nice)
Surf the net (Mozilla Firefox FTW)
Warez (Rapidshare, I hate torrents)

We don't really need to know that you use warez dude.

I was trying Server 2008 last week and, at first sight, seemed better than Vista. I ran Dolphin x64 on it flawlessly and faster than on XP x64. Just sucks that my activation period will expire soon... but oh well, I got it just to try it out anyways.

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by MiretanK

We don't really need to know that you use warez dude.

I was trying Server 2008 last week and, at first sight, seemed better than Vista. I ran Dolphin x64 on it flawlessly and faster than on XP x64. Just sucks that my activation period will expire soon... but oh well, I got it just to try it out anyways.

interesting,
does Server 2008 support directX?

[MiretanK]

**** yeah, it's just like vista but being as fast and responsive as xp! =D

as an eyecandy whore, I only miss the media center, sidebar, and other applications from vista... but 2008 is the most decent SO from MS so far. loving it.

Though I just can't say "MOVE TO IT DAMNT" because I have no idea if you'll have problems with software incompatibility and stuff like that... I should try some apps and post my results here. =))

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by MiretanK

**** yeah, it's just like vista but being as fast and responsive as xp! =D

as an eyecandy whore, I only miss the media center, sidebar, and other applications from vista... but 2008 is the most decent SO from MS so far. loving it.

Though I just can't say "MOVE TO IT DAMNT" because I have no idea if you'll have problems with software incompatibility and stuff like that... I should try some apps and post my results here. =))

if i do move to it, i would do it for the DX10 and because i'm getting 4GB of ram, and need a 64bit OS to support it.

i would also just dual boot, and keep my XP as a backup.

i'm thinking though, most-likely its going to have the same compatibility problems as vista.

[lagunareturns]

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

1) sucky backwards compatibility, and problems with legacy I/O devices... such as parallel ports

Backward compatibility has gotten better with every update to vista, im actually surprised how many games work now, some are even better in vista than xp, the only issue i got with backwards compatibility is scarface doesnt work (sure its more of an nvidia driver issue), oh also turok 2 on pc, idoits said it works fine but play it more than 10 min and you may notice flickering graphics (which vista solved with the updates) but can be resolved with alt-tab out and in to the game but the bigger prob is that youll eventually end up with invisible enemies... yeah the game works fine on vista.

also i found legacy support for hardware on vista superior to xp as long as there is compatible drivers, if you can get drivers that work on vista chances are you can get it working more better on vista, well thats from my experience.

therefore the issues in backwards compatibility in both hardware and games (dont want to say software, cos in the case of software it either works or it doesnt) is not entirely vistas fault but more with the drivers

[Binary]

of course Windows Server 2008 does not have as much services enable as vista. Server 2008 needs all the power it can get for schools and business's

[mudlord]

it's just like vista but being as fast and responsive as xp!

Oh rly?

Or maybe you are getting the placebo effect because of that quad core CPU of yours, like so many others that say Vista is "fast".

Personally, I found Vista to be sluggish as hell, even though my PC exceeds the system requirements by a large margin.

[lmf]

Originally Posted by DB7

If you like UAC but would like to make it more like the MAC version, in that it doesn't blackout your screen and prevent access to your other applications, here is how to do it.


Be warned however that this will slightly reduce your security but it is a better solution than turning UAC off completely.

how about go to the msconfig and select the disable UAC! i've done this before XD

btw how can i disable the digital signing feature? i couldn't install MSDN 2008 on my pc..it always prompt me cab14.cab etc is not digitally sign whatsoever blah blah blah..argh that makes me sick

[Squall-Leonhart]

Originally Posted by mudlord

Oh rly?

Or maybe you are getting the placebo effect because of that quad core CPU of yours, like so many others that say Vista is "fast".

Personally, I found Vista to be sluggish as hell, even though my PC exceeds the system requirements by a large margin.

Its not Placebo, the server equivalent tends to have the bloat services disabled, and better memory optimisation.... its like Windows 9x and the way running it in Dockng mode was faster then desktop mode :P

[DB7]

Originally Posted by lmf

how about go to the msconfig and select the disable UAC! i've done this before XD

Well I wouldn't do it through msconfig, I just don't trust myself using it. When I disable UAC, I do it through the User Account page in the Control Panel.

Originally Posted by lmf

btw how can i disable the digital signing feature? i couldn't install MSDN 2008 on my pc..it always prompt me cab14.cab etc is not digitally sign whatsoever blah blah blah..argh that makes me sick

Try doing this at your own risk, because messing with options like Digital Signing can mess things up.

Open a command prompt window with Administrator privileges and type in:

Bcdedit.exe /set nointegritychecks ON

Reboot and try installing the driver again.

or if the above doesn't work, again enter a elevated command prompt window and type this:

bcdedit /set loadoptions DDISABLE_INTEGRITY_CHECKS

Reboot and try installing again.

[Squall-Leonhart]

try googling harder next time, that method has been removed since Vista went RTM.

[DB7]

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

try googling harder next time, that method has been removed since Vista went RTM.

Thanks for letting me know. How about though rather than just mocking me (which is incredibly easy to do I admit), you contribute something worthwhile to helping the guy solve his problem?

[Squall-Leonhart]

also i found legacy support for hardware on vista superior to xp as long as there is compatible drivers, if you can get drivers that work on vista chances are you can get it working more better on vista, well thats from my experience.

stop smoking crack

Thanks for letting me know. How about though rather than just mocking me (which is incredibly easy to do I admit), you contribute something worthwhile to helping the guy solve his problem?

I contributed, See above.

[MiretanK]

I hate doing that, but chill down Squall. Being gross won't help the discussion and might give you an infraction.

[mudlord]

Its not Placebo, the server equivalent tends to have the bloat services disabled, and better memory optimisation....

Really? hmmmm....

So its just the retail versions of Vista that are sucky.....