My Vista Rant

I've spend a LOT more time fixing (or hacking or kludging) problems with the Vostro 1700 computer than I've spent doing useful work since I got it.

I'm a programmer and a techie and a handy-man. I can't help it.

So it's TORTURE.

1. LOG IN. No choice but to use that 'friendly' login with the icons identifying every user account, or auto-login with zero security. If you enable that (by editing the registry with regedit), the screen flashes in a very unattractive way several times while booting, but far less unattractive than booting the system, walking away, coming back and realizing you still have to log in and wait through all the 'Startup' crap to get up and running. This became a problem because I had to enable the 'Administrator' account and give it a password so that I could use 'runas' to get a CMD prompt that could do things to the system (such as run 'defrag' and tell me what's going on). Doing a LOT of operations through the GUI is too painful and they've dumbed everything down by hiding/removing so much information and many options that it's useless.

My 'su.bat'...
runas /env /user:Administrator cmd

2. They moved around all of the settings again. Lots of hunting around to find settings that have been in one place for years. Some settings are just GONE, like the ability to have a simple 'enter your name and password' login prompt. The 'Network Neighborhood' stuff is a complete mess. It looks like they don't leave file sharing on for every network by default... but they make you MANUALLY enable it each and every time you connect to any network.

3. Be prepared to buy 'upgrade' versions of EVERYTHING. At least everything that does something interesting or important, like VMWare, drive tools, and partitioning tools (yes, Vista has some 'shrink volume' tools in its 'disk management', but like everything else in Vista, they're ineffective - a partition with 28GB on it couldn't be shrunk below 98GB), etc. All C compilers and command line build tools that I've been using for years all of a sudden quit. Especially GNU tools. Something about launching/environment is buggered now, and they'll all have to be updated and rebuilt... whenever someone who knows what the problem gets around to it AND manages to convince whoever has the project keys to LET THEM.

4. I got the desktop/start menu passably resembling Windows 9x again. I abhor the new, fruity colored transparent crap they dumped onto the desktop and UI. The icons that come with it are all low contrast and hard to identify in any UI mode or background color. Lots of animation and crap in drop down menus still happens, and nothing will make it stop. I WANT TO USE MY COMPUTER, NOT WATCH CARTOONS! I got rid of the side-bar. I couldn't decide whether I hated it, and finally decided it was useless and distracting.

5. No Tweak UI for Vista. No straight-forward means to cure all of the OLD Windows garbage that pissed me off that they carried forward and 'improved' in their unique Microsoft way (read: MADE MUCH WORSE).

6. That multiple "You will have to approve this... Approve this? Approve this some more? Some more?" dialogs suck. I don't mind giving Administrator/root permission to do something, but don't WARN me about a one-click operation, and then immediately forget that I did it! This is worst when re-organizing the Start Menu, where most applications still want to turn it into a fourteen-foot-long scrolling nightmare, instead of something simple and hierarchical. I tend to categorize my apps and stick them into sub-folders, but not every installer gives me the choice of WHERE it dumps its stuff in the Start Menu, and everybody thinks their software is the most important thing on my computer, so everybody dumps it into the root, where I have to clean it out. Some of them even re-install the icons in the root when they 'auto-update'. Swell, not a problem that started with Vista, and apparently Microsoft will never do anything about it but punish the people whom it annoys most.

7. Copying and moving files with Explorer is a nightmare. Prepare to dismiss enormous windows with huge buttons multiple hundreds of times when you drag & drop folders. Definitely makes me appreciate the command line tools like xcopy, or rsync... oh, except that they broke most of the GNU-like tools, including compilers and make tools. How do you break a command line tool? Well, it's easy if you're Microsoft.

8. The 'Common Dialogs' (File Open, File Save, Save As, etc.) suck as bad as they ever did and MORE. Now they come up in a two column format UNDER the 'Details' headers, except it's not 'Details', and it doesn't match up AND it never remembers that I want to see Details. So I look down the left column every time and can't see files I expect to, only to discover it's two-column. For folders full of pictures, the preview icons were all showing an island until I went into the folder settings and tracked down the new check-box that made that icon view something other than useless.

9. In the ongoing war against fair use, the computer came with NO BOOTABLE INSTALL MEDIA. I spent $70 for 'Ghost 12', because (equally evil) Symantec bought out PowerQuest and stuck Drive Image into Ghost and provided no upgrade path for my previous software. SO, I'll be able to boot and recover this unmitigated dung heap of an OS if it goes. If the hard drive crashes, most people will have to ship it back to the factory or buy/obtain Windows installation media to re-install it.

10. Mystery tasks. By default, the system does indexing and defragmenting and all manner of horrors WHILE YOU USE IT. So your notebook battery will take a beating AND the system will be more sluggish while the drive light flashes away constantly for reasons you have to sleuth around for and infer from what's eating all of the CPU/IO. Nope, no setting for 'battery mode' to prevent this stuff that I could find. You have to find where it's scheduled and disable it item by item, and the schedules scattered around.

Vista is definitely NOT a viable direction to go if you use your computer for anything but a game console for 'Solitaire'. Maybe it will get 'better' in a couple of years when they've shipped out enough service packs to replace the OS four times over. Then it will only suck to use, as opposed to being a Hellish useless, expensive waste of my time, which it is right now.

Microsoft has always been inept, but in vista we see a model of just how bad they are.

Some of this I could 'get used to', but why the heck should I? You may as well tell me shoes that are cripplingly painful to wear will 'break in in a few months'.

And I know I can't go back. Vista is here to stay, and I won't buy a copy of XP and give Microsoft further award for their crimes against humanity. Maybe I'll just boot into a full-screen vmware of Windows 2000 for my software development.

I loathe Dell for shoveling this excrement at me with my new computer, and I hate myself because I should've been smart enough not to order from a company that force-feeds me Microsoft's latest unusable crap-ware.

 

XP, Linux, or OSX. The three best platforms on the market. Vista is just Windows ME with Aero.

 

I dont think vista is bad as ME...just wait a bit. it will get better. Its definately not the best OS right now but hopefully itll get better. I felt that way w/XP when it was first released.

 

Oh, I'm sure it will get 'better'.

I mean, if you're on fire, but then someone throws raw sewage on you, then... at least you're not on fire anymore.

 

Ah, I'm not the only one annoyed.
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20070804

 

Don't like it, dont use it. I'd love to go back to vista,,, but only once Nvidia fixes it's damn video drivers. Nvidia forceware wont let me run my LCD's native rez of 2880x900 on vista for some stupid reason, so I DLed a ripped copy of XP PRO off the net. Works great and I'm now enjoying 2880x900 rez again

I think I'll switch back when Crysis is released, when vista will actually show what it's worth.


BTW, everyone complains about that in vista, the UAC crap! You do know you can turn it off easily right?

 

i know everyone has had their problems with vista..just wait pretty soon everybody will be wanting vista...maybe...lol

 

Quoted for emphasis. This is just ridiculous

Which is only partly Vista's fault. The problem is that Windows applications have always been programmed like crap. Now Vista suddenly starts enforcing the guidelines that have been there since Win2k was released, and software starts breaking left and right.
In particular, it's my experience that if anything GNU has a Windows port, it's a complete hack that completely ignores every guideline about interface or program behavior, so not too surprised it won't work on Vista. Perhaps it's time for the open source evangelists to show the superiority of their programming model by actually making their Windows ports follow even simple guidelines.

That's not an excuse for Vista though. It's not exactly a problem Microsoft didn't know about, and they could have done a lot more to ease the transition.

Agreed. I don't particularly care for the Win9x look, and the shinier interface of Vista is fine by me, but for heaven's sake, what's with all the stupid animations and fade in/out transitions? Sure, they might impress 7 year olds, but for anyone who actually try to *use* their computer, it just slows things down.

Actually, I've always found Microsoft programs to be the worst offenders here...

Was always a nightmare on Windows. That's not to say Vista can't make it worse still though.

Disagree with that one. As said above, I've always been appalled with the windows ports of primarily Linux software. It's pretty obvious that no one in charge gives a damn about the windows ports.

Which isn't a good thing. What would be good is if they'd implemented UAC the way Mac and Linux have worked for decades. If they'd implemented it so it was actually usable.
Forcing users to disable half of the OS isn't exactly the most impressive selling point. Forcing users to go back to how Win95 worked is not a good thing.

 

I like Vista even though it has it's problems. But Vista IMO is not an Upgrade from XP. More like a Downgrade. I can't think of any reason to choose Vista over XP. Maybe SP1 or 2 will give me a reason, but for now I don't even Dual Boot Vista as it makes no sense to have two Windows, and I'm not kicking XP to the curb for Vista.

 

Exactly. I've lost count of the threads I've seen where people start listing all these things you're supposed to turn off to make Vista work. That's ridiculous. If you have to turn off a dozen services to make Vista behave more like XP (which is what everyone really wants Vista to behave like when they talk about its sluggishness, its bloat, its awkward and confusing configurations), then what's the point of installing Vista (and not XP) to begin with?

Imagine if every new OSX release required you to disable a third of the "new" features in order to *approach* (not equal; merely approach) performance of the previous release. That's what Microsoft has sunk to, and that's what people are telling us to consider *normal*.

 

You make it sound like such a HUGE thing, it's not! UAC is just another form of garbage that can be turned off easily, it's not HALF THE WHOLE OS, it's just a POS thing that pops up when a process tries to start. It's just like a firewall, which is also one of the first things to go on any OS I use, it's useless, unless your a corperation.

Most of these new protection things will not help anyone, it's 99% of the time, the user's fault for getting hacked into, or getting a virus etc. If people used a little more common sence they wouldn't need that much protection on thier PCs.

I'm going to say what I keep saying... if you dont like it, DONT USE IT, it's your own option, no one's forcing you to use Vista, just trying to persuade you into it.

 

But Vista comes with most new PC's now, so it's not a matter of ... if you dont like it, DONT USE IT. Not to mention Notebooks with only 512MB are being sold with Vista installed which is basically like selling a Car with with only 2HP.

And MS advertises Vista as something completely different, when in fact it's not.
So I think people have every right to complain about Vista. Not to mention the Driver problems.

 

does vista really suck that badly? I was so syched to finally get it when I purchase my laptop...

 

Running Vista on a laptop will introduce you to a wealth of other awesome features. Shorter battery life, a hotter computer, and a constantly-whirring fan are three of the luxuries enjoyed by people attempting to use Vista on mobile computers...

Of course, you'll only notice these three features if you compare your computer running Vista to your computer running XP. Otherwise, you'll find these things perfectly normal. Which is exactly Microsoft's idea behind bundling new laptops with Vista, and manufacturer's plans with cutting XP drivers for V-preloaded laptops.

 

Vista isn't that bad. Don't forget ME introduced the "system restore" feature. Vista is still in it's infancy and in time will blossom, like when XP first came out. I've heard people bash XP before and swear they wouldn't change their present OS (Win98, Win2K). People are resistant to change at first but will change their color once they have no choice.

 

Looks newer, this way.

This is rich. I had heard something about that utility but I didn't know it was that useless.

Somehow, I'm not surprised to hear that.
GNU Tools/Unix Utilities are the best command line tools in my age old Win98se desktop. It would have been too much for MS to let them work in Vista.

LOL. So I am not alone!

I wonder why the size of the buttons have been steadily increasing in the last few years. Maybe Bill Gate's eyesight is getting worse?

I heard that if you call Dell they would send you a copy of the disc at no charge. At least in the US. Someone said that they are required to.
Have a look atthe Dell forum of this site.

I am a newbie, but I've read somewhere that Vista has to "learn" your profile in order to adapt itself (and the way it caches to RAM) for a LOL "better experience", as they say nowadays.
Could this be part of the reason?

See? You've taught Vista not to tamper with your HD.

You could move forward.
How about Linux?

I take it you don't have a copy of Vista Business to "downgrade" to XP then.

Some people are getting refunds from Dell for refusing to agree at Vista's EULA. Too bad you discovered the "usefulness" of Vista only after you accepted the agreement. You could have asked a refund and use that to but a copy of XP (if Windows is what you need for your work) or something better.
Showeling some of that fine sotware into their throats might teach them that it'd be wiser to give the customer freeedom to choose.

(I had to choose Vista because in my country the Vostro come only with that OS - since it is V. Business I can still upgrade it to XP).

 

I don't see what the big deal with vista is. I had to tweak it like I did with xp and aftewards I have 11 processes running while idleing (10 without sidebar) which uses 325-400 mb max. Its not that big of a change from xp to justify the " after 1 day of vista I am going back to xp" statements i constantly hear. I personally have had not any real issues and dont find it much different then xp. Its not as much of a system hog as people say it is but yes I admit its more intensive then xp. When I first booted up I was expecting something vastly different but was surprised to find its not really that big of a difference they way people were bashing it.

 

I use Vista's Sidebar on XP and I use Windowsblinds which has better glass like themes than Aero.

 

Please tell me where to get the VISTA sidebar for XP. Thanks, Dave

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=104765&highlight=VISTA+SIDEBAR+XP

 

Quoted for truth. I havnt had any problems either. I'm running with two gigs of ram and this os runs as smooth as butter.

 

Shyster

What services are you disabled? I have like 43 with my antivirus and sidebar.

 

Well, it's not like I absolutely couldn't go back to XP... It's just that I program for a living, and now that Vista's around and obviously breaks things that worked under XP, I have to use Vista to make sure the code always builds and works under Vista. I can't give out source code without Vista build and setup instructions, because some poor soul will have Vista, and nothing will work for them!

Sure, I'm presently doing 'Flash' games (which requires either Windows or a Mac to develop for), but when I get back around to the server work, I'll still need to be sure the thing runs. I also do Linux work (more server), but I mostly run that under VMWare with a front-end running under Windows. As bad as Vista is, I know the computer runs with Vista, and I've always had the 'worst luck' with Linux for driver compatibility.

Anyway, I do recall when XP 'replaced' all the Win9x/ME stuff and broke everything because it had NT guts instead of the 16 bit OS with the 32 bit hacks in it, and it also broke all the venerable FAT/FAT32 tools because it used NTFS by default, and tended to be shipped that way. But I was using Windows 2000 at the time and didn't have to put up with it. It's really the sheer volume of badness that dumped on me all at once.

 

I had to tweak the hell out of XP to get it to the settings I like. I had to tweak the hell out of Vista to get the settings I like.

 

no vista = no dx10

only reason i'm giving it a fighing chance. only real big problem i've had (which is HUGE since i have my pc for gaming) which i'm not blaming vista alone, its nvidia as well, is during graphic intense games like Rainbow six vegas, NO MATTER what settings i use from lowest to highest my game with freeze up and i get some stupid message about my dispaly driver XXX stopped responding and has recovered. Other then that i dont mind vista at all.

It has is problems which i'm hoping with time will be worked out as everyone has said.

 

What driver are you using?

 

I haven't had any issues with Vista so far. 2.0ghz Pro Duo, 2GB ram, and a 8600M GT runs the OS 'smooth as butter'. It works much better then my old HP laptop (running XP), and gets far better battery life and produces about 10 times less heat. I did have to mess around with the settings at first, but I've found I do that for any OS the first time I use it.

As stated, Vista = DirectX10, and as a game programmer I can't wait to dig in. Visual Studios is my workspace of choice, and I've yet to run into any major problems with 05 and Vista.

I'm apparently easily entertained, because I actually enjoy the look of Aero. I've been using crap PCs for a good amount of time, disabling anything that would make it look attractive for performance sake, but now that I have a decent PC that can run an attratice OS, I'm hooked.

So far I haven't had any issues with Vista. It works for what I need it to do, and DX10 is just too much to let go of.

 

Apparently this site hates this computer. No idea how the double post happened and now I can't seem to edit it away. Frick.

 

I'm currently using Vista 32 bit drivers 163.15, so far since driver update i've had only 2 errors, much better then the every 5 minutes, with dell stock drivers,

i seen in a couple other posts about setting my fan speed at max might help fix the problem and that some ppl have tested it and think that error i am getting is due to vista and when my laptop heats up causing an error when it should be speeding up the fan but i dont know haven't tried that yet, thought i would do the driver update first, which seems to have helped

as per the look of Vista, i am easily amused and was really into the look of xp and using windows blinds so i love the look of aero lol, was glad all my normal programs worked and hope everything gets better

 

Sure, everyone has their Vista rants, if you do not like it, then get rid of it and install Win XP or Linux, we do not need to see any more rants, we have already seen enough.

Damn.

 

I don't know, the Explorer in Vista is a nice improvement. Having a folder tree on the left pane allows dragging and dropping of files w/o two seperate windows open. I also really enjoy the "breadcrumb" navigation from the addressbar. I find it extremely useful and efficient.

So Vista isn't horrible. If it was identical to XP, people would say that there weren't enough changes. Some of the changes the OP stated just take a little tweaking or getting used to.

 

I think the one annoying thing is when you buy a new pc or laptop, you're forced to take Vista. Not to mention the cost of that OS is figured into the cost of the laptop. So that bites.

However, people can install Linux if it really bothers them.

 

In my opinion, it seems that, in general, all the people who are technologically knowledgeable despise Vista; perhaps it is because they can see beyond the pretty interface and recognize Vista for what it is. I don't find this particularily surprising since Microsoft has always catered their software towards people who don't know how computers work, or how they should work.

In the end this means that Microsoft can get away with releasing software like Vista because the users don't know any better because they've probably never used potentially rewarding alternatives to MS software, such as OSX or Linux.

The way I see it, if computer users want the negative aspects of MS's software to disappear, they have to learn to separate good software from bad software, and stop using poor quality software because they think they have to. People have to become a little more educated about computers; whenever I look into buying a high-price, high-commitment product I'm not familiar with, I try to do some research about it first, so I can make better informed decisions. Thats really all I can say in response to the OP's long list of Vista complaints. If you don't like Vista, don't use it.

 

In my opinion, anyone who generalizes about others is ignorant. Otherwise, I agree that MS is definitely gearing more toward people who aren't extremely knowledgeable. And sometimes it is annoying to bypass all of the "features" meant to clarify the software to n00bs. Microsoft is trying to bring computing to the masses, and has pushed it to an amazing level. Maybe Vienna or Windows 7 will have a "Guru Edition" for those who want a finely tuned machine that isn't dumbed down in the slightest.

 

Instead of making 30 different versions of the next OS, they should try the OSX approach of one version that...just works. It's pretty obvious that the 6 or 7 Vista versions are simply in existence to increase their profit margins. I guess that's why we're not going to see *one* WindowsOS for a long time to come.

 

The general public is getting more geekier by the year, so sooner or later the general public will not fall for this MS marketing crap and the average user will know the REAL value in a OS, Hardware, and Software.

 

I completely disagree with this. If there was only one version of Vista, it would be Ultimate (has all features). It would be crazy expensive (as it currently is) and you'd have to deal with features you never wanted.

I know for a fact there are people out there that would spend $100 less for Home Premium or Business depending on their needs. There are also people that would like the security and functionality improvement without paying another $200 for Ultimate, so they get Basic. The versions were tailored to include or exclude features for a particular market segment. They all serve a purpose other than simply money making. Because, assuming MS sells the same number of copies, it would be way more lucritive to just set a flat price of $400 on Vista Ultimate (the only edition) and you have to pay that price for all features.

Different strokes right?

 

Why does MS have to charge so much in the first place? Why can't they do what Apple does with OSX. I don't hear of anyone wanting a cheaper stripped down version of OSX just to save a buck.

 

People are willing to pay that much, so Microsoft is charging that much.

 

That's what MS does. I don't know what OSX goes for, so I can't really compare. Only MS knows what goes into the product to justify the price. Plus, the difference in number of users between the two indicates that the Windows user-base is perhaps a touch more diverse in needs.

 

MS is damn near a monopoly, thats why people are so-called willing to pay that much. Because they NEED it.

MS is basically the only fully compatible & Legal option for PC users.

I wish Apple didn't depend on it's OS to sell Computers. Then maybe if OSX was available to PC users, those people who are so-called willing to pay for MS wouldn't.

If Apple can make/design a Unique "Innovative"(as apple like to call things) Notebook, then maybe they can attract people to buy their hardware without the OSX factor. Then they would allow OSX on any PC.

 

Most OS's allow the user to install or remove features at will from their packages. If MS wanted to do it the Apple way (or the Linux way), they could simply sell VUltimate for $200 and allow people to pick and choose which features they did or didn't install. There's absolutely no reason for Vista to be $400 as it is; that's merely greed on MS's part. And the dividing of the OS into 7 variously-crippled editions is an excellent way of justifying the injustifiable price of Ultimate. They know they wouldn't be able to get away with charging $400 for it if it was the only version they sold. So what do they do? They remove various bits and pieces of it, and repackage it under different names (Home Basic, Home Premium, Home Premium Basic, etc), so Vultimate can be at the top with $400. That's not offering users choices, it's just greed. They did the math, and figured out they'd make more if they sold VUltimate at $400 and various handicapped versions at lower prices than if they sold one flat Vista at a reasonable price.

 

That's a really important point imo. People who say MS isn't a monopoly are missing something fundamental. True, you can get software for other OS'es too, but you can't get the same software. The software that people actually depend on, and have depended on for the last 20 years. If you want to use that, you're locked into Microsoft's OS.

That makes it a monopoly. Not on software in general, obviously, but on PC software. I can't just switch to Linux if I want to be able to use all the software I already own.

 

"... in general, all the people who are technologically knowledgeable despise Vista..."

And anyone calling others ignorant based on one debatable statement is in turn a little too quick to brand others. I am willing to dispute my previous statement because I believe that it is correct. Post a thread in the forums; read around a bit: it is painfully obvious even to Microsoft that a majority of users and critics, individuals who work in the computer sector for a living, report that Vista is a piece of crap.

 

I've tried vista before, and personally I found it to be quite similar to XP in terms of usage. Icons looked a little better, interface looked prettier, but those shouldn't be the target of complaints. Anyone can modify the icons to their heart's content, and customizing the GUI is just a matter of finding the right software. Personally, I found vista a lot easier to set up because most of my laptop's devices were already configured after install. Graphics drivers sucked, as well as the power management, although I only lost about 20min of battery compared to others who've lost an hour or more.

I think the problem is that people have been so used to Windows XP that anything else just feels weird the first time around. On the other hand though, MS has gotten increasingly anal about their products, requiring validation, certified hardware, confirming each action you do, and not really providing a good online solution database (for when vista crashes and you decide to allow the OS to search online for solutions).

 

Amen, brother.

 

I think Vista is great. I think the only reason people are bashing it is because that's all they do with their time is find EVERY little thing wrong with Vista. I'm on a friend's PC which has Vista, and I think it's great. Runs smooth and does what I want.

I think everyone should stop complaining and get off Microsoft's back. That or stop using Vista.

In case you didn't know, you can use Mac or Linux. Make your choice, but shut up with your complaining.

 

I do not think Vista is that bad. I have been using Vista Ultimate for a while now. It is great! It looks better and it runs smoothly. When I was using Windows XP, I installed it and uninstalled it many times before being happy with it. I used nLite and applied many other tweaks that could be found to make Windows XP work as I wanted. With Vista, I have not done much to tweak it yet, and it just works fine. I like it, and I do not think that I will go back to Windows XP.

 

Do you guys remember in the late 70's when there were a handful of companies biding for supremacy in the OS war? People cried out for a better interface and Microsoft delivered. People picked it because of the iconic GUI and it's simplicity. IBM, Tandy, variants of DOS, Unix, Commodore and others couldn't deliver. Monopoly? I agree. Why? Because that's what the majority decided back then. Businesses quickly took sides and unfortunately those computer companies lost the war and most even disappeared.

Software/hardware developers sided with Microsoft because that was where the profit would be, catering to businesses, corporations and your ordinary Joe. To say that Microsoft shoved it's OS (Windows) to unsuspecting, run of the mill peoples' throats is undeserved. You have to look in the past to see where we are today. My suggestion is if you find your ideal OS then use it but to badger MS for what they did is just babble. And, what's the reason for comparing Windows and OSX. They are completely different OS's and to say one is better than the other is dumb. Each one has it's niche. At least Microsoft develops programs for the Apple OS. Does Apple do the same for Windows users? And why does Apple now is able to use Windows thru their interface? Because they can sell more computers to the masses who likes Apple but can use Windows programs. Apple looks like they too want a piece of the pie and I don't blame them. It's all planned, why do you think Apple choose Intel for their new chip? So it can work with Windows! IBM chips were proprietary and it wouldn't run Windows. Vista is great, XP is great, OSX is great, choose your poison and get a life people. The next Windows OS is, if developers gets on the ball, looks cool with table top interface and virtual interfaces. It'll make Vista look ancient. People will then again complain that it requires more resources and $$$ to attain and will stay with Vista.

Can never satisfy a handful and unfortunately they're the ones that has the loudest voice and people who are satisfied gets suckered into useless arguments. No matter what you say they find something else to nit-pick. Wise man say: Don't argue with idiots because they'll bring you down to their level and beat you. Peace out.

 

I don't think Vista is bad either, but both MS and PC Brands state that Vista is best used with 2GB RAM PCs. Although works well with 1GB, don't think about doing heavy multitasking on it. And don't even think of using with 512MB unless you want problems. Do MS or PC Brands care that 512MB is a no-go and 1GB is borderline? Of course they don't. They have Retail & Online stores selling 512MB with pre-installed Vista. Now how do you not expect complaints.

Also Vista has the hugest Driver problems of any previous Windows during first year of release. No other Windows OS had Drivers problems this bad during first year release. There are also Minor things about Vista, like the once in a while Data Execution Prevention (DEP) that seems extra sensitive on Vista compare to XP(which DEP never gave me a problem).

I also had more crashes(although not a lot) of Vista than XP. XP is just much more stable IMO. Maybe that will change when Vista gets Service Packs.

IMO, I just can't see anything that Vista does better than XP besides offer a smoother feeling and better looking GUI. So why Vista when XP uses less recourses and can actually perform better at the moment.

Again, Vista is Pretty Decent. I especially like Vista 64Bit(yes you can feel the differ). But Vista is more like a add-on to XP rather than a complete Upgrade of an OS. I guess I was excepting the same "wow factor" transition like going from 2000/ME to XP gave me.