Vista: good or bad?

[gamefreak94]

Big Race USA and Fantastic Journey run under Vista. I did not try Timeshock, though.

If you haven't tried it, you can't guarantee it works.

it has yet to annoy me once about DRM or software I installed.

It doesn't always, but Microsoft themselves claim that it is there and it does a load of unnecessary stuff

That's why they made this application to check your hardware compatibility with Vista

The tool checks if your hardware is capable or not, it doesn't actually make it work though and I bet your old PC couldn't have any video card more than 5 years old, see this is just what I mean, my older P4 had a Nvidia FX5500 on it and it said that Vista wouldn't work well if I ran games. And if you see the system requirements for any game, you'll see that if it requires 1 GB for XP, it'll require at least 2 GB for Vista.

That's like running XP on a pc from 1998

If you read one of my previous posts on the same thread, you will see that my third PC, a Dell Optplex GX1, a 550 MHz P3 with 128 MB RAM and no video memory runs XP just fine (a minute or two slower at start-up but otherwise nothing much) that PC is from 1996

..came with the pc.

When you say that Vista came with the PC, it doesn't mean you got it for free you know, the price of the OS is always included in the price of the PC. Microsoft will NEVER offer ANYONE or ANY company a free OS

Other than that many old games won't work, GTA San Andreas definetly won't

faster than what? and when?

Oh I don't know XP MAYBE!!!!! and all the time, even with speedstep or Power Save! on, Vista requires more computing power even when idle, so there

why are people with old pc's so eager to run Vista?

Maybe because they are also humans!!!! they have the same curiosity about new stuff as you and I do.

They look nice. If your rig can pull it off, you want em on

well its not exactly a bargain, I would never want to put up with all the problems for a some semi-transparent windoes and floating toolbars just because they "look nice"

[DB7]

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

Other than that many old games won't work, GTA San Andreas definetly won't

GTA - San Andreas does run on Vista but to be fair I had terrible graphics glitching that I couldn't solve for the life of me. Ran fine on a friend's copy of Home Premium though.

[gamefreak94]

Not just that, for example when I surf the web and download apps, I do so without any though as to whether my OS will compatible with it or not, whereas with Vista, although software support for it is increasing, you have to look a bit deeper to see if Vista is supported or not. Many older softwares support only Windows 2000 and XP

[DB7]

I've been quite lucky with the software I've used on Vista but I admit that I don't have a great variety on my PC.

My basic programs that I have installed on the Acronis image are; Photoshop Elements v1, DC++, Digiguide, Multilingual Speaking Clock v2.01, ItweakU Professional, Firefox v2, Microsoft Office XP, Nero Burning ROM, WinRAR and Symantec Anti-virus Corporate.

The only program I had to download a new version of was Nero (Symantec Anti-virus has a Vista compatible version on the install disc), everything else ran on Vista as it did on XP. Even my tweaking program worked under Vista for certain things, such as changing the background of the Explorer toolbars, but of course for others things it just couldn't do anything because of the changes in how Vista works.

Some of the older games I've tried work better under Vista than they did on XP SP2 with the dual-core hotfix. Fable TLC and Star Trek - Armada were very unpleasant to play on XP but ran without a problem on Vista.

[S.SubZero]

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

If you haven't tried it, you can't guarantee it works.

Pinball - Vista Forums

I bought a package called Ultimate Pro Pinball which contains Timeshock, Big
Race USA and Fantastic Journey for $19.99 at Gamestop. These games perform
100% better on Vista then they did on XP. No flippers getting stuck or
anything.

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

It doesn't always, but Microsoft themselves claim that it is there and it does a load of unnecessary stuff

Windows Vista Team Blog : Windows Vista Content Protection - Twenty Questions (and Answers)

Windows Vista's content protection mechanisms are only used when required by the policy associated with the content being played. For Windows Vista experiences, if the content does not require a particular protection, then that protection mechanism is not used.

Note that Microsoft did not invent, nor are they responsible for controlling, DRM. If MS didn't want to put DRM in Vista, they'd have to make Vista not be able to play DRM-protected content at all. DRM is a requirement of the content providers. No company can knowingly make DRM-free devices that can play (and allow copying of) DRM content without getting in a ton of trouble. This is not MS's fault and not Vista's fault. If you want to complain, complain to the content providers.

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

The tool checks if your hardware is capable or not, it doesn't actually make it work though and I bet your old PC couldn't have any video card more than 5 years old, see this is just what I mean, my older P4 had a Nvidia FX5500 on it and it said that Vista wouldn't work well if I ran games. And if you see the system requirements for any game, you'll see that if it requires 1 GB for XP, it'll require at least 2 GB for Vista.

Vista's legendary bloat and hardware requirements seem excessive, but nobody is forcing anyone to upgrade an old PC to Vista. While "mileage may vary" on five year old computers, on a new PC purchased today with even fairly low specs Vista can run and run well.

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

If you read one of my previous posts on the same thread, you will see that my third PC, a Dell Optplex GX1, a 550 MHz P3 with 128 MB RAM and no video memory runs XP just fine (a minute or two slower at start-up but otherwise nothing much) that PC is from 1996

If you are in a financial position that you are clinging to 12-year old computers, you're probably not in a position to legally purchase and use any edition of Vista. Fairly simple conclusion to me.

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

When you say that Vista came with the PC, it doesn't mean you got it for free you know, the price of the OS is always included in the price of the PC. Microsoft will NEVER offer ANYONE or ANY company a free OS

PC makers get a massive cost break by pre-loading Vista. It achieves more than just "selling Vista".. MS would practically be willing to take a loss to get the OS on a machine since once that user buys say, Office, the cost is immediately made up. For years Windows was little more than application marketing. They got Windows on the PC for whatever it cost, then just waited for the application purchases.

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

Other than that many old games won't work, GTA San Andreas definetly won't

YouTube - Windows Vista *San Andreas* / *Vice City* fix

The oldest game I have installed and ran in Vista x64 is the original Age of Empires, circa 1998. It ran without issues.

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

Oh I don't know XP MAYBE!!!!! and all the time, even with speedstep or Power Save! on, Vista requires more computing power even when idle, so there

Vista does housekeeping when it's idle. It runs defrags, adjusts Superfetch, does indexing.. It doesn't just sit there waiting for the user to whine about how Windows requires periodic maintenance. It takes care of the bulk of that for the user, transparently.

__________________
-SSZ

[Samor]

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

If you haven't tried it, you can't guarantee it works.

I didn't say it does. I do know the other two work. The flippers indeed do not get stuck in Vista, although this was perfectly fixable in XP as well.
Some games actually benefit from the fact that dsound is not present, as weird as that may sound (this because some games had very buggy 3d sound implementations).

It doesn't always, but Microsoft themselves claim that it is there and it does a load of unnecessary stuff

link please where MS says it does?

The tool checks if your hardware is capable or not, it doesn't actually make it work though and I bet your old PC couldn't have any video card more than 5 years old, see this is just what I mean, my older P4 had a Nvidia FX5500 on it and it said that Vista wouldn't work well if I ran games. And if you see the system requirements for any game, you'll see that if it requires 1 GB for XP, it'll require at least 2 GB for Vista.

so? compare 98 with Xp... and that card was a Geforce 4 TI.. bought it in 2003. Does not do Aero, because it doesn't have dx9 support.

If you read one of my previous posts on the same thread, you will see that my third PC, a Dell Optplex GX1, a 550 MHz P3 with 128 MB RAM and no video memory runs XP just fine (a minute or two slower at start-up but otherwise nothing much) that PC is from 1996

it would be faster with win98... see how sucky xp is?
and uh, the Pentium 2 was introduced in 1997. That's quite the time-travelling P3 you've got there

When you say that Vista came with the PC, it doesn't mean you got it for free you know, the price of the OS is always included in the price of the PC. Microsoft will NEVER offer ANYONE or ANY company a free OS

really, I didn't know that ...so, how is that a disadvantage of Vista, if other software, like, uh, XP, also costs money?

Other than that many old games won't work, GTA San Andreas definetly won't

which others then? We've got GTA SA, MGS2 and Midnight Club. I'm sure you can find a few more, but how big exactly is that list of yours?

Oh I don't know XP MAYBE!!!!! and all the time, even with speedstep or Power Save! on, Vista requires more computing power even when idle, so there

Aha, well, might be true. ...and "all the time" eh? hmm... I did search on the net and found you're referring to an article from 2006. I'll give you 2007 for free. Let's see how it is now... I assume that because it runs heavier, it would consume more power indeed, but I'd like to know how much that is when comparing XP SP3 to Vista SP1, and not anything older.

Maybe because they are also humans!!!! they have the same curiosity about new stuff as you and I do.

yes, and that's why you can blame it on the OS if it doesn't run on an old pentium.

well its not exactly a bargain, I would never want to put up with all the problems for a some semi-transparent windoes and floating toolbars just because they "look nice"

I wouldn't either. I just don't have any of the problems.

__________________



YouTube Channel
Current consoles: Xbox360, Playstation2, Dreamcast
Geometry Wars: 447850

[gamefreak94]

Here we go again.......

link please where MS says it does?

I think you have something called the Internet at your disposal, but incase you haven't worked out how to use a search engine, visit About Digital Rights Management (DRM) and protected content in Zune of course they don't openly claim to ruin your privacy but in case you forgot your reading glasses I'll quote a bit out of it:

DRM technology is used by content providers, such as online stores, to control how digital music and video files are used and distributed. Online stores sell and rent DRM-protected music and videos that have media usage rights to enable specific use of the content.

In layman's terms, your computer is completely vulnerable to companies that want to look at your personal data. Unlike before, when you could easily block the cookies, DRM is a built-in feature in Vista. Check out BadVista.org: Stopping Microsoft Windows Vista adoption by promoting free software — BadVista to read about the mess it creates.

so? compare 98 with Xp

Why should I? 98 offers nothing in comparison with Vista, Unlike this case, Vista doesn't offer much of an advantage over XP (and is infact at a disadvantage in most cases) to make its memory hogging properties seem worthwhile

see how sucky xp is?

No it isn't! its managing to run on an age old PC without crapping out during installation. Try to install Vista on an old P4 and you wont even have to blink until an error pops up saying "blaah blaah hardware not supported"

how big exactly is that list of yours?

not very big but thats not the point, its not the quantity but the simple fact that the game doesn't work!

but I'd like to know how much that is when comparing XP SP3 to Vista SP1, and not anything older.

I am not a computer technician you know, so learn to use a search engine instead of nagging me with your lame questions. I thing I can say, is that it wont be a minute early or so, because the whole Internet is choked full of criticism for Vista on this matter.

yes, and that's why you can blame it on the OS if it doesn't run on an old pentium.

My point exactly, just because we have Vista ready machines doesn't mean that the whole world does! They should be able to access the latest OS's as well, Xp allowed and still allows them to do that, but Vista (for obvious reasons mentioned over the past few pages!) doesn't

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

I haven't bothered to use it

I don't know how you can have such a big opinion about it then. There's a bunch of happy vista users in this thread telling you it's fine and you're sitting there, having NOT tried it, listing off reasons why it sucks....most of which are either completely inaccurate or not really valid.

__________________

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]

Its my opinion, all my close friend have used it and they complain, and my personal idea has been shaped by those, if you find Vista to be the OS of your choice, then I am happy for you. There is just a bunch of facts in front of you, you can view those from a hundred different perspectives and that is one of the fundamental characterstics of what humans usually do. But now that you have insisted me so much, I might give it a shot some day after all. Regardless of this forum, I would eventually have done so out of shear curiosity.

[Samor]

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

Here we go again.......



I think you have something called the Internet at your disposal, but incase you haven't worked out how to use a search engine, visit About Digital Rights Management (DRM) and protected content in Zune of course they don't openly claim to ruin your privacy but in case you forgot your reading glasses I'll quote a bit out of it:

yeah uhm.. that's about the Zune.....

In layman's terms, your computer is completely vulnerable to companies that want to look at your personal data. Unlike before, when you could easily block the cookies, DRM is a built-in feature in Vista. Check out BadVista.org: Stopping Microsoft Windows Vista adoption by promoting free software — BadVista to read about the mess it creates.

"badvista" Yeah, I believe all the articles from theregister too =P

Why should I? 98 offers nothing in comparison with Vista, Unlike this case, Vista doesn't offer much of an advantage over XP (and is infact at a disadvantage in most cases) to make its memory hogging properties seem worthwhile

dunno what you're trying to say here..

No it isn't! its managing to run on an age old PC without crapping out during installation. Try to install Vista on an old P4 and you wont even have to blink until an error pops up saying "blaah blaah hardware not supported"

I bet it will just install, and your age old pc isn't as old as you claim anyway.

not very big but thats not the point, its not the quantity but the simple fact that the game doesn't work!

yes, one game I like does not work, so the entire OS must suck!

I am not a computer technician you know, so learn to use a search engine instead of nagging me with your lame questions. I thing I can say, is that it wont be a minute early or so, because the whole Internet is choked full of criticism for Vista on this matter.

I noticed you're not a computer technician. I did use the search engine, but I have trouble finding confirmation for your unfounded remarks. Even the link you posted is about the Zune media player and not about Vista.

My point exactly, just because we have Vista ready machines doesn't mean that the whole world does! They should be able to access the latest OS's as well, Xp allowed and still allows them to do that, but Vista (for obvious reasons mentioned over the past few pages!) doesn't

That's right, when XP came out I grabbed my old 286 and it just worked!

__________________



YouTube Channel
Current consoles: Xbox360, Playstation2, Dreamcast
Geometry Wars: 447850

[mudlord]

If your rig can pull it off, you want em on

No you don't!

I just want a OS that does the job and I am now running a high end Core 2 Quad!

I just want a OS that does the job with no BS.

And I can assure you, I have ZERO place for the visuals Vista offers.....
And as such, I am NOT using Vista. Making program's Vista only is just extremely selfish. Other OSes are usable, so that matters.

Yes, I take Martin Korth's views.

Go ahead Spyhop. Flame me for developing for 95-XP.

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by mudlord

Go ahead Spyhop. Flame me for developing for 95-XP.

*shrug*
I encourage better looking OS's. I don't like plain rooms with white walls and I don't like plain grey boxes on my OS. I don't think it's in any way a bad thing to make something look better. And Aero does so at a miniscule expense. Honestly, Aero on or off, it doesn't matter for performance.

__________________

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

[DB7]

Originally Posted by mudlord

..
And as such, I am NOT using Vista. Making program's Vista only is just extremely selfish. Other OSes are usable, so that matters.

Why would you have to make programs for Vista only if you are using it as your OS? Is there some part of Vista's EULA I've missed.

Or did you mean something completely different?

---

Last edited by DB7; July 22nd, 2008 at 00:42..

[CForever]

Alright guys, I've been seeing alot of things go back and forth here, alot of which is pretty damn correct (And that which hasn't been... was shot down promptly XD) I use Vista Ultimate on my new Dell Inspiron 530 (1GB RAM, 1.8 Dual with 8m L2 Cache, nVidia 6300GS)
And I haven't had too many problems. I've had random ethernet crashes, but whether I could attribute that to Vista itself or the drivers/hardware having it's own issues is up in the air. Every now and then Aero crashes, but that is why I turned it off, NOT BECAUSE IT EATS SYSTEM MEMORY/GRAPHIC MEMORY. I wouldn't want to play games on it, not because it won't run them (I haven't had trouble running ALOT of things), but because I do feel like I would be running my processor and RAM harder than is necessary w/out turning certain services off (UAC and Aero being good examples) I am a certified MCP and MCTS (WinXP and Vista), and have spent quite an amount of time on identical computers with either (or both) operating systems on them, and in the end the idle differences are negligible (2% [XP] as opposed to 5% [Vista] CPU power on my Inspiron 530 according to TaskManager, and 0% [XP] and 4% [Vista] on my Latitude D620) I was opposed to Vista when it first came out, mainly because of the re-arrangement of explorer and some administrative tools. Whether it be XP or Vista on a home computer, I say you should stick with what you LIKE. SP1 for Vista fixed quite a few bugs, and since has given very few home users any trouble at all. So, go with what you like, and if you haven't had a chance to fiddle with Vista, then find a friend who has it and ask them if you can poke around their HDD.

[gamefreak94]

Well Samor, I thought we put this arguement to rest, you like Vista, so you walk home with that, I like XP so I walk home with that, but since you are so desperate on dragging this arguement forwards, let me tell you that I wont be the one to back down.

"badvista" Yeah, I believe all the articles from theregister too =P

I the hell care whether you believe or not! Its my opinion!

dunno what you're trying to say here..

I think someone with an actual brain would! But I'll repeat it in simpler words for sake of arguement, comparing Windows 98 with XP isn't the same as comparing XP to Vista (XP has a much higher edge in the first case than Vista does in the second case)

I bet it will just install, and your age old pc isn't as old as you claim anyway.

I remember SOMEONE saying not too long ago that they had a 2.8 GHz P4 and Vista wouldn't install because the graphics card was not supported. And that is a pretty high-end P4, the starting models only had a 1.3-1.6 GHz processor

Oh yeah and the actual date is July 1999, not exactly a 21st century PC is it?

yes, one game I like does not work

Like I said, my opinion, and there are probably more, I don't think you've carried out a research which confirms that only one game doesn't work

so the entire OS must suck!

It doesn't suck based on just that, the other 50 reasons mentioned over the past 4 pages also come into account I think!!

That's right, when XP came out I grabbed my old 286 and it just worked!

286 date of release: February 1982
Windows XP date of release: October 2001

Pentium 4 date of release: November 2000
Windows Vista date of release: July 2005

How fair is your comparison, 26 year old processor won't run XP, blame goes on XP. 8 year old PC won't run a 3 year old Vista, Vista emerges completely faultless. I think you should revise your grade 3 Maths book, getting a bit rusty with the substractions.

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by gamefreak94

It doesn't suck based on just that, the other 50 reasons mentioned over the past 4 pages also come into account I think!!

Out of those 50, maybe one or two were somewhat valid and even then they were blown way out of proportion. Most of the reasons people give for not liking Vista are either ignorant misconceptions or hearsay.

__________________

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

[lagunareturns]

Originally Posted by Spyhop

Out of those 50, maybe one or two were somewhat valid and even then they were blown way out of proportion. Most of the reasons people give for not liking Vista are either ignorant misconceptions or hearsay.

Out of those 50 plus reasons, half are solved with the updates... Out of the games that dont work now after the vista updates is mainly ones due to driver issues or the game was poorly developed like mgs2, it doesnt work 100% on any os so expecting it to work on vista is pointless, and my fav game beyond good and evil works if you disable hardware transformation and lighting but then it requires a powerful cpu still issues like this can be solved with driver updates that is if nvidia see it as a driver issue since the game still works anyways...

This brings to the issue of the testing issues of vista especially when the public involved when idiots report turok 2 on pc works when it only works for 30 min then enemies and objects start to disappear. It is an issue that still exists today because it wasnt, like many things on vista, tested properly and once vista was released it went to damage control because the allot of the public testers werent reporting bugs or issues properly.

It is a great os now after the updates and the hardware upgrades but any os even win 98 and win xp required hardware upgrades, sure it wasnt as much as vista, still it was not a surprise to me especially if kept your eye on the release candidates, so quit complaining about hardware requirements when it is so much cheaper now to upgrade the hardware for vista then it was for win xp and win 98.

---

Last edited by lagunareturns; July 23rd, 2008 at 02:28..

[StriderVM]

Vista is decent. I just don't want to put it in my computer for a simple reason :

I don't need it's features.

Well, for me, I seriously can't see the difference between most games medium and high detail settings to games, and even DX9 lighting and DX10 lighting. (Maybe I'm blind.... )

I don't need the Vista interface either, I just turn all eye candy features off even on Windows XP.

Maybe primarily because I don't need much eye candy, just 60FPS performance and being able to see my opponent.

... And since Vista also occupies a larger hard disk space (That I can use for something else.) and more idle RAM (Which I'd prefer to use on games) ..... I'll stick to Windows XP until basically all new games won't run on it anymore.

__________________
Current PC specs :
AsRock 945GCM-S
Pentium Dual Core E5200 @ 2912Mhz (233x12.5)
Palit Radeon 4850 Sonic 512MB gDDR3
2x2048MB Kingston DDR2 800Mhz RAM

[Spyhop]

Originally Posted by StriderVM

Maybe primarily because I don't need much eye candy

If it's already there, though, why go out of your way to turn it off? It doesn't save performance.

And since Vista also occupies a larger hard disk space (That I can use for something else.)

That almost sounds like a cop-out. Hard drive space is peanuts.

and more idle RAM (Which I'd prefer to use on games)

Games don't use as much ram as they can get their hands on. If you had 3.2GB ram, even running Vista there would be no way you'd max that ram out. I have 3.2 (4gb on a 32bit OS) and the worst ram usage I managed was 70%. Usually it's around 60 when I have a game on. Vista using more ram than xp doesn't matter when gamers already have way more ram than they need to accomodate everything they do.

__________________

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

[mudlord]

If it's already there, though, why go out of your way to turn it off? It doesn't save performance.

Because it is not wanted. It is that simple.
We don't want "features" forced down our throats.

That almost sounds like a cop-out. Hard drive space is peanuts.

However, that is zero excuse for requiring up to 40GB HD space. That is what I call bloated. Unless you prefer running software with a huge memory footprint.

Games don't use as much ram as they can get their hands on.

And Vista should be the same. Its senseless making a program that seems like its whole purpose is generating excessive memory leaks. Unless, you like programs eating all your RAM, leaving little for other programs.