Vista: good or bad?

[DB7]

Even if DirectX 10 was capable of being installed on XP, Microsoft would never do it as they want people to move onto Vista. Some enertrpising people might get it to run but it isn't worth the time or effort at the moment since most games still have a DX9 .exe even when installed on Vista.

But onto the subject of the thread, is Vista good or bad? Well I'm going to say good but not worth moving to if you are happy with XP.

On the times that I've used Vista I've been quite happy with it most of the time, being able to install most of my programs from XP (I needed a new version of Nero) and the only drivers for my hardware I needed to get were a new graphics driver and one for my Lexmark X1180.

The great problem with Vista for me is the new user interface, which is completely counter-intuitive for me, and the fact I am doing nothing on it that I can't do when my PC is running Windows XP.

I'd suggest sticking Vista on a virtual pc for a while and see if you can get accustomed to the new user interface because I think that will be the sticking point.

On another off-topic (kind of) point I find it quite amusing that people call Vista ME II, because that was another Microsoft operating system that I had few problems with, in fact I had less problems with Windows ME than I did with 98SE. I also had far more problem moving from ME to XP than I had moving from XP to Vista.

I think that because XP has been on the market for so long people have developed rose tinted glasses about how crap it was on launch. I still remember the problems XP had with USB modems before service pack one came out.

[Coolsvilleman]

Vista is ok. But you really need a beefy computer or it will be pretty useless.

__________________

Q6600 Core 2 Quad || Soundblaster X-Fi Extreme HD || e-VGA 8800GTX || 4096mb 4-4-4-12-2T Dual-Channel RAM || MSI P6N Diamond || 2x 320GB Hardrive || 5.1 Speakers || Remote control || 8x USB 2.0 || DVD/CD ±RW Drive || 1x IEEE1394

www.coolsvilleman.homedns.org Normally down. E-mail me for a DVD @ coolsvilleman@gmail.com

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by Glaedrin

Um are you calling the effects that Linux does have not eye-candy? Just because it can render them more efficiently on OpenGL than Windows can with DX 10 dose not mean they aren't there...?

Before you go on with your ignorance on this subject try reading this very well written article and watch the vid, it will probably blow your mind.

oh my god. READ what I wrote. I said "with the exception of a few linux desktop OSs, ie Ubuntu". A desktop OS would certainly use eye candy and I'm more than familiar with Compiz, I've been using it since XGL desktops were in their infancy. You might want to have a look at some of my earlier postings in the desktop thread.

MOST linux distros are meant for servers though. People usually won't even use GUIs on the server versions. Hence, less resources required.

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

its all aload of bs if you ask me, XP can run Dx10, and theres no reason it would need a massive change to the os, just backport Dx10 to XP, we don't need the memory virtualisation or any of the TDR Bs, just the effects...

i still can't believe people buy MS's bs so easily.

Vista's differences become apparent with heavier use. There's more to it than just eye candy. (although the eye candy is nice). There's more to the OS than what you're saying. This is just lame bandwagon MS hating.

Originally Posted by Coolsvilleman

Vista is ok. But you really need a beefy computer or it will be pretty useless.

Another Vista myth. We had Vista running on a bench on a P4 2.8 and 512MB of ram and a mediocre video card. We were even playing WoW on it. Took a little longer for things to load, but it ran fine.

__________________

WINTERFELL - C2D E8400 - DFI Lanparty JR P45-T2RS MATX Motherboard - Mushkin Redline PC2 8000 DDr2 - EVGA Geforce GTX 285 - Silverstone SG01 case
RIVERRUN - Pentium DC 2.5ghz - 4GB OCZ DDR2 - Cheapie ASUS Motherboard w/onboard vid - Antec Sonata III
KING'S LANDING - 80GB Playstation 3

---

Last edited by Spyhop; July 20th, 2008 at 17:53.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

[Glaedrin]

Originally Posted by Spyhop

MOST linux distros are meant for servers though. People usually won't even use GUIs on the server versions. Hence, less resources required.

There are several Linux distros that are very easy to use, Ubuntu should not get all the credit as Fedora, Debian, Mandiva, and Freespire are other versions that are not that different from Ubuntu. Stop bashing every other Linux distro, although they can be used for servers (very well) it is like saying you can't use Windows Server 2003 because it is made for servers (I prefer it to Pro because it does not use as many resources)

Originally Posted by Spyhop

Vista's differences become apparent with heavier use. There's more to it than just eye candy. (although the eye candy is nice). There's more to the OS than what you're saying. This is just lame bandwagon MS hating.

Yeah, the differences include much more DRM, Microsoft sold what was left of their soul for Hollywood money.

Originally Posted by Spyhop

Another Vista myth. We had Vista running on a bench on a P4 2.8 and 512MB of ram and a mediocre video card. We were even playing WoW on it. Took a little longer for things to load, but it ran fine.

Oh, yeah, tell that to the dead burnt laptops I have seen, Vista uses more resources, it is a fact, and yes, Vista can run on that comp, but considering that XP or Linux would run with no slowdowns at all why would you. It is like the many retarded Computer "technicians" that I have seen that installed XP on a comp running with 128Mb of RAM and a Pentium II and say that the 15min it takes for the comp to start up is normal (NO it's not, it's paging the already old HDD to death!)

__________________
One civilized reader is worth a thousand boneheads - Smart Set magazine, 1914

CPU: AMD 4600+ 2.41Ghz
RAM: 2Gb of Corsair DDR2 4-4-4-12 800Mhz
Graphics Card: ATI X1900XT
OS: Windows XP SP2 FTW

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by Glaedrin

There are several Linux distros that are very easy to use, Ubuntu should not get all the credit as Fedora, Debian, Mandiva, and Freespire are other versions that are not that different from Ubuntu. Stop bashing every other Linux distro, although they can be used for servers (very well) it is like saying you can't use Windows Server 2003 because it is made for servers (I prefer it to Pro because it does not use as many resources)

If there is a god he will move this thread to the bin so I can stop restraining myself with you. STOP ADDING MEANING TO MY POSTS THAT ISN'T OTHERWISE THERE. I didn't bash any linux distro. Some linux distros are designed to be desktop OS's, I gave Ubuntu as an example only as it is most prominant. More Linux distros are designed to be servers. This is not bashing. This is simply the way things are.

Yeah, the differences include much more DRM, Microsoft sold what was left of their soul for Hollywood money.

Bandwagon bull*****. I haven't had to modify my media usage habits one iota in using Vista, and my media libraries are extensive (this is as overt as I will be on emuforum in respect for the rules, but I guess you'll understand my meaning)

Oh, yeah, tell that to the dead burnt laptops I have seen, Vista uses more resources, it is a fact, and yes, Vista can run on that comp, but considering that XP or Linux would run with no slowdowns at all why would you. It is like the many retarded Computer "technicians" that I have seen that installed XP on a comp running with 128Mb of RAM and a Pentium II and say that the 15min it takes for the comp to start up is normal (NO it's not, it's paging the already old HDD to death!)

*facepalm* just...stop. Vista isn't going to burn out a goddamn laptop. If a laptop is dead it already had a hardware problem....Vista didn't cause it. Yes Vista has higher hardware requirements. Every future OS will. This is common bloody sense. But Vista's hardware requirements are hugely exaggerated by bandwagon haters. And, really, 1GB recommended is nothing today. 4GB of ram is $100 nowadays.

__________________

WINTERFELL - C2D E8400 - DFI Lanparty JR P45-T2RS MATX Motherboard - Mushkin Redline PC2 8000 DDr2 - EVGA Geforce GTX 285 - Silverstone SG01 case
RIVERRUN - Pentium DC 2.5ghz - 4GB OCZ DDR2 - Cheapie ASUS Motherboard w/onboard vid - Antec Sonata III
KING'S LANDING - 80GB Playstation 3

[gamefreak94]

Microsoft does bluff about its products though, they claim that Vista can run on an 800 MHz CPU and a 32 MB video memory (now that is just pure bs!). On the other hand, XP SP2 is a really effecient OS. My third PC (which I rarely ue for obvious reasons) is a Dell Optiplex GX1, a P3 and not just any, the very first model with 550 MHz CPU and a 128 MB RAM and no built-in or external video memory. Other than taking a minute or so longer at start-up and MS Office being pretty sluggish, there isn't any instability or crashes (though I totally agree that this "isn't normal, its paging the already old HDD to death") But this is just to show that all Microsoft OS start off with a lot of criticism and most bugs are corrected in SP2 and until then, it isn't advisable to have it if you are even half-satisfied with XP.

Furthermore, rumor's gone around that Microsoft is abandoning Vista because XP SP3 came out after Vista's release, though probably not true, its going to be intersting how Microsoft manages to get of this dime novel because, at the moment, even XP SP3 is causing problems with Internet connections for example and this is exactly why Microsoft isn't forcing its SP2 users to upgrade to SP3.

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

Microsoft does bluff about its products though, they claim that Vista can run on an 800 MHz CPU and a 32 MB video memory (now that is just pure bs!).

Minumum requirements for Vista Home Basic according to MS:
1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
512 MB of system memory
20 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space
Support for DirectX 9 graphics and 32 MB of graphics memory

Minimum Requirements for all other versions according to MS:
1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
1 GB of system memory
40 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space
Support for DirectX 9 graphics with:
WDDM Driver
128 MB of graphics memory (minimum)
Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware

Completely realistic requirements. 32mb video is absolutely fine for non-gaming usage.

On the other hand, XP SP2 is a really effecient OS. My third PC (which I rarely ue for obvious reasons) is a Dell Optiplex GX1, a P3 and not just any, the very first model with 550 MHz CPU and a 128 MB RAM and no built-in or external video memory. Other than taking a minute or so longer at start-up and MS Office being pretty sluggish, there isn't any instability or crashes (though I totally agree that this "isn't normal, its paging the already old HDD to death") But this is just to show that all Microsoft OS start off with a lot of criticism and most bugs are corrected in SP2 and until then, it isn't advisable to have it if you are even half-satisfied with XP.

I wouldn't say XP is more efficient as much as it requires less resources. But we know this. 98 required even less resources. 95 even less. 3.1 less still. We could keep going back but it's not fair to compare a 6 year old OS to a 1 year old one and tout that it takes less resources. Vista takes more. It gives more back. And we can spare the ram it requires.

Furthermore, rumor's gone around that Microsoft is abandoning Vista

LOL. Vista's not going anywhere. It'll be MS's flagship OS until Windows 7 comes out.

__________________

WINTERFELL - C2D E8400 - DFI Lanparty JR P45-T2RS MATX Motherboard - Mushkin Redline PC2 8000 DDr2 - EVGA Geforce GTX 285 - Silverstone SG01 case
RIVERRUN - Pentium DC 2.5ghz - 4GB OCZ DDR2 - Cheapie ASUS Motherboard w/onboard vid - Antec Sonata III
KING'S LANDING - 80GB Playstation 3

[Squall-Leonhart]

Why do you think they pushed windows 7 forward and extendeds SP3 support to 2014
? BECAUSE VISTA IS TEH FAIL.

As for SP3 having issues with networks.... i've not seen any.

__________________

VBA-M | Xtemu | NGOHQ | Post Impact Productions | TNHW | XBCD 0.2.6 | Satanic666's Emulator Compiles
Don't be a NOOB, READ THE NGEmu/EmuForums Rules of Conduct
Need Help with ePSXe? This is your first stop!.
If you don't post all the required information, you don't get help.
Everytime someone posts a romsite, God kills a beautiful woman.

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

BECAUSE VISTA IS TEH FAIL.

No. Because negative ad campaigns (thanks apple) and people listening too much to their friends who had problems with vista on their pentium 2's have convinced people that there's something wrong with Vista and there isn't. Sure there were some problems on release (as with any software). But not near as much as XP when XP was released. People have convenient memories.

__________________

WINTERFELL - C2D E8400 - DFI Lanparty JR P45-T2RS MATX Motherboard - Mushkin Redline PC2 8000 DDr2 - EVGA Geforce GTX 285 - Silverstone SG01 case
RIVERRUN - Pentium DC 2.5ghz - 4GB OCZ DDR2 - Cheapie ASUS Motherboard w/onboard vid - Antec Sonata III
KING'S LANDING - 80GB Playstation 3

[PCXL-Fan]

I pretty much agree with you spyhopsian.

The real problem for me with vista is I'm satisfied enough with xp and I want to maintain compatability with several of my old titles like Pro Pinball Timeshock! or Systemshock 2 which I had to scour the net to find an xp compatability patch. I don't think there are ones for these old titles yet on vista.

Vista is nice but I don't want to spend the time familiarizing myself with all the nuances of a new OS. Vista simply doesn't offer me enough over XP to go through the hassle of getting everything working just the way I like.

IMO Microsofts main problem was letting everyone settle in and get accustomed to XP and waiting 6 years before bringing out a new OS. People are so happy, fat and sassy with their current OS they don't want to move unless the new one offers something not just good but really really great over XP.

__________________

Try @ES the ultimate emulator frontend and all in one media player

Originally Posted by Exodus

Yes, I like anime, Street Fighter, Japanese music and download video game music. Yes, I know... I've changed.

gamersat678's Bug Reporter ||| cottonvibe's pcsx2 guide for noobs ||| GSdx plugin ||| DirectX End-User Runtime Web Installer

---

Last edited by PCXL-Fan; July 21st, 2008 at 02:21.. Reason: arrrg ....spelling mistake

[mudlord]

people listening too much to their friends who had problems with vista on their pentium 2's have convinced people that there's something wrong with Vista and there isn't.

So Vista is infallible in your eyes?

I'm not going to say any more on the issue as many people know my views on software that has a large footprint.

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by mudlord

So Vista is infallible in your eyes?

Nothing is infallible. But too many suggestable people are making Vista out to be this epic disaster and it's fine.

__________________

WINTERFELL - C2D E8400 - DFI Lanparty JR P45-T2RS MATX Motherboard - Mushkin Redline PC2 8000 DDr2 - EVGA Geforce GTX 285 - Silverstone SG01 case
RIVERRUN - Pentium DC 2.5ghz - 4GB OCZ DDR2 - Cheapie ASUS Motherboard w/onboard vid - Antec Sonata III
KING'S LANDING - 80GB Playstation 3

[PCXL-Fan]

Originally Posted by Spyhop

Nothing is infallible. But too many suggestable people are making Vista out to be this epic disaster and it's fine.

Also it's who makes the OS that makes a difference. People like taking the 800 pound gorilla off his throne and cheering on the underdog. If Mozilla came out with Vista and Microsoft's flagship was still XP people would be going alot easier on Vista's flaws.

Many current Vista detractors would hale Vista as the greatest OS ever thoroughly trump XP, then overlook its increased system requirements and compatibility issues with older software.

I'm not saying it'd be any of you guys, just many m$ haters in general.

__________________

Try @ES the ultimate emulator frontend and all in one media player

Originally Posted by Exodus

Yes, I like anime, Street Fighter, Japanese music and download video game music. Yes, I know... I've changed.

gamersat678's Bug Reporter ||| cottonvibe's pcsx2 guide for noobs ||| GSdx plugin ||| DirectX End-User Runtime Web Installer

[Glaedrin]

I'm not saying that I hate Microsoft, I am just more open to other practical OS's. Trust me, the last thing I want is millions of ignorant people switching to Linux cause I would be the guy going to their house just to install some drivers.

Microsoft do make several great products such as Server 2003, ISA and Exchange (although the new Exchange has a lot of issues with XP networks at the moment) *I cannot form a reliable opinion on Server '08 because of lack of experience with it* I do think that their Office suite could stand to be cheaper though.

The thing I'm trying to say is that after such a long development schedule and beta, and the extraction of several features that I expected much more from Microsoft. Just as you would expect a car manufacturer to come out with a better model, (i.e. w/o flaws the previous one had) I had expected the same from them. In this day and age they should be capable of that.

Maybe they should stop with the 50+ million code OS refresh and should start offering an OS "upgrade" that comes every few years that does not interfere with too much with drivers and such?

__________________
One civilized reader is worth a thousand boneheads - Smart Set magazine, 1914

CPU: AMD 4600+ 2.41Ghz
RAM: 2Gb of Corsair DDR2 4-4-4-12 800Mhz
Graphics Card: ATI X1900XT
OS: Windows XP SP2 FTW

[Squall-Leonhart]

Spyhop is obviously taking kickbacks from Microsoft.

My Uncle, worked on the XP Rollout in Australia, The company who did the roll out rejected the chance to handle the Vista roll out, because they had the information, that spyhop typically is blindly rejecting as fud.

Unfortunately, the truth, to people like Spyhop, is always going to be twisted to meet their own expectations and desires.

Vista Sucks.
The majority of people have deemed it.
Business has deemed it.
and Large corps such as IBM have deemed it, while they may sell pc's running Vista, (as a choice), you'll find they are running XP on most of their machines within IBM itself, simply because Vista, is not a worthwhile upgrade over XP.

Anything you can do on Vista, can be done on XP 3x faster.

__________________

VBA-M | Xtemu | NGOHQ | Post Impact Productions | TNHW | XBCD 0.2.6 | Satanic666's Emulator Compiles
Don't be a NOOB, READ THE NGEmu/EmuForums Rules of Conduct
Need Help with ePSXe? This is your first stop!.
If you don't post all the required information, you don't get help.
Everytime someone posts a romsite, God kills a beautiful woman.

[Marcis]

I disagree with all the Vista doomsayers.

I've got it running perfectly fine on my 5+ years old system (which I'm typing from now). The only thing needed is RAM which I've got 1,5 gigs of (DDR too!). My cpu is an Athlon XP 3200+ and my GPU is a 9600 pro so you guys can't say its a powerhouse!

And I describe myself as a poweruser. I did set up server 2003 and the AD at my job so I think I know what I'm talking about.

Vista, since SP1, is AT LEAST as good as XP SP2 was. Sure you've got a bunch of unsupported drivers but that's not really MS's fault is it ? And yeah the moving around of stuff in the control panel is not what I would have hoped for (god why did you have to play with classical mode!) but once you learn the difference after about 2 weeks (and this only applies to power users as regular useres will NOT notice) its as good as SP2.

Now I'm not saying its worth a 100$ more so if your old system works there's no real need to upgrade but if you get a new comp, don't shy away from it.

Don't listen to the propaganda.

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

Spyhop is obviously taking kickbacks from Microsoft.

No, I'm just not a retard. I've also been down this road with Win98 and 2000 users when Windows XP was the new kid taking a the heat from rabid computer users with only half information. This is the same ****, different day.

My Uncle, worked on the XP Rollout in Australia, The company who did the roll out rejected the chance to handle the Vista roll out, because they had the information, that spyhop typically is blindly rejecting as fud.

OMG no! Not THE information! We are undone!!! You're cute when you're flinging non specific accusations.

Unfortunately, the truth, to people like Spyhop, is always going to be twisted to meet their own expectations and desires.

WTF are you talking about? I'm the one of the only ones here NOT twisting information around to suit a pre-determined notion that my OS of choice is good or bad. I tried Vista when it came out. It wasn't ready. I tried it after SP1. Works great now. Just like every other MS OS after an SP release. People are *****ing about nothing now and are downright militant about it. It's ludicrous.

Vista Sucks.

Again, you say so without any valid reason.

The majority of people have deemed it.

The majority of people are computer retards who accept those stupid "I'm a Mac" commercials as cannon. I talk to the majority of computer users at my job. I have to explain to most of these idiots how copy and paste works. The "majority" as been proven as an unreliable judge as to what's good or bad in the computer world.

Business has deemed it.

Businesses don't care. As long as their users can log into their domain or VPN or whatever they have set up they have no reason to upgrade. Many businesses would still be using Windows 98 if MS hadn't ceased support on it. Hell, many STILL do. The business sector is not a good litmus test on the popularity of desktop OS's.

you'll find they are running XP on most of their machines within IBM itself, simply because Vista, is not a worthwhile upgrade over XP.

This is probably true, but for the reasons I stated above. Businesses only care that their employees can still achieve the tasks set to them in a timely fasion. Vista's newer features cater mostly to home users, not business. No business is going to shell out money for every new OS, it's a waste. What they have now works.

Anything you can do on Vista, can be done on XP 3x faster.

LOL!!!! I'm a million billion trillion times sure that you're exaggerating!!! You lose any meager credibility you had in this discussion with this one statement.

__________________

WINTERFELL - C2D E8400 - DFI Lanparty JR P45-T2RS MATX Motherboard - Mushkin Redline PC2 8000 DDr2 - EVGA Geforce GTX 285 - Silverstone SG01 case
RIVERRUN - Pentium DC 2.5ghz - 4GB OCZ DDR2 - Cheapie ASUS Motherboard w/onboard vid - Antec Sonata III
KING'S LANDING - 80GB Playstation 3

[Squall-Leonhart]

Nope, its standard fact, that XP is still faster then Vista. anyone who dares say otherwise doesn't deserve to have a computer, as they clearly don't know how to maintain it.

I recently installed Vista, albeit under protest, on a friends computer, hes running a E6600, Geforce 9800GX2, and XFi, 4GB's.

On fresh install, my Pathetically ancient Athlon3000 with 1gb of DDR out performs it.
ITs not the os thats installed, its what you do with it that determines the performance out of it. oh, and...

[14:03] <Squall-Le> Operating System: WinXP Professional 5.1 SP3 (Build #2600)
[14:02] <Squall-Le> Installed On: Monday, March 21 2005

Yeah, that pwns that a nearly 4 year old install is pwning a fresh install of Vista.

__________________

VBA-M | Xtemu | NGOHQ | Post Impact Productions | TNHW | XBCD 0.2.6 | Satanic666's Emulator Compiles
Don't be a NOOB, READ THE NGEmu/EmuForums Rules of Conduct
Need Help with ePSXe? This is your first stop!.
If you don't post all the required information, you don't get help.
Everytime someone posts a romsite, God kills a beautiful woman.

[Spyhop]

Then you didn't know what you were doing when installing OS on said friend's computer. But I'll give you the opportunity to prove this so-called 3x performance. Choose your benchmark and run it. I will run the same on my Vista machine. We'll post screenshots here.

__________________

WINTERFELL - C2D E8400 - DFI Lanparty JR P45-T2RS MATX Motherboard - Mushkin Redline PC2 8000 DDr2 - EVGA Geforce GTX 285 - Silverstone SG01 case
RIVERRUN - Pentium DC 2.5ghz - 4GB OCZ DDR2 - Cheapie ASUS Motherboard w/onboard vid - Antec Sonata III
KING'S LANDING - 80GB Playstation 3

[Squall-Leonhart]

i don't have to prove crap to you. The proof is prevalent on 70% of websites, XP still owns Vista in terms of performance.

__________________

VBA-M | Xtemu | NGOHQ | Post Impact Productions | TNHW | XBCD 0.2.6 | Satanic666's Emulator Compiles
Don't be a NOOB, READ THE NGEmu/EmuForums Rules of Conduct
Need Help with ePSXe? This is your first stop!.
If you don't post all the required information, you don't get help.
Everytime someone posts a romsite, God kills a beautiful woman.