So, I'm looking at all the people/links bashing Vista... and...

Honestly, it's about as much opinion as the topic I made.

Looking at this link:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html#response

So there's a chance? But your not certain? *

After reading carefully thru all the idiots bashing Vista, all I'm finding is reading a bunch of links to a few CERTAIN things, and then a HELL of a lot of speculation. And then these people pretend to know what they are talking about.

I've heard people say Vista scans your machines millions of times per second. It erases your hard drive. It watches you. The people are becoming about as paranoid of Vista as the president.

*

What's funny is that people who have actually used Vista could easily prove these links wrong. But people refuse to listen.

Just tell me this, Vista has been released how long? And Microsoft has released how many details?

So where exactly are these details coming from?

There hasn't been enough time for someone to take Vista apart and examine how it works. It just seems funny that when the DRM stuff came to light, all these links suddenly appaeared. Funny AND convenient...

The point of the topic is, you don't know hardly anything about the program and you already think it's Satan incarnate. Either get Linux *

 

These guys bash Vista the same way rednecks bash global warming activists. Just ignore them.

 

Where Jalf?!?!?!?!


Anyways, Vista is actually bad. It may not have the particular drawbacks listed in the article, but the DRM things are very annoying. It's my content and want to use it a manner that pleases me, not the recording studios. Do I care if conponent is not "secure" enough. NO. I just want to be able to output my computer to a tv. They have absolutely no right whatsoever telling me what I can and not do with stuff that I bought.

 

I like a lot of what Microsoft did with Vista. I hate what they're doing to make it a media platform. Even if it doesn't turn out to be "that bad" -- even if the big media companies don't take advantage of the harsher DRM-- it's wrong to have it there in the first place. It's a step in a very bad direction.

Of course there're people who bash it just because they're sheep. There're people who praise it because they're sheep.

How's that? h'yuck, h'yuck.

 

*

Oh btw, I can run HDTV stuff just fine on a tv tuner.

I can record it just fine.

I have component cables with protected stuff connected to my pc (xbox 360, well the games ARE protected), none has disabled yet.

Would you like a picture? It'll take me awhile...

Care to make an explanation on my 'strange experiences'? Oh I get it, Microsoft would NEVER disable their own products,*

The entire point is your jumping entirely to conclusions when you don't know all the facts. It seems to me from experience that all the drm boils down to is drm for blue ray and hddvd.

 

You claim that these people flaming Vista have no proof; yet here you are, without any proof yourself!

Microsoft is a business, and they want our money, it's as simple as that. The fact that they own an OS monopoly effectively allows them to write the rules for the way they write the OS and treat their customers. Digital rights management is a real problem, not some sham, and the truth is, it only used to be a little while ago that WMP didn't bother me about music subscriptions, or ask me for licenses to play certain files. MS doesn't have a clean record for this kind of stuff, and their goals are transparent; they want 100% market share. They've done questionable things in the past to suggest that we should continue to question them today; would YOU trust Microsoft with your personal files and personal work? * Consumers have a right to question MS's motives and aims.

"So there's a chance? But your not certain? *"

They are saying that Vista's media protection capabilities are there, implemented into the OS, and that some people may be forced to buy new hardware to conform to the OS. They are not screwing around here as you say.

 

They said there's a good chance you'll need to buy a new video card.

So if they knew, why are they unsure? Why the chance?

Once again, assumptions. It's all assumptions. Assumptions that people are trying to pass off as facts.

 

From all that i've read about Vista, some say it's the Media Moguls trying to get a bigger piece of the pie and trying to stop pirating of the higher end media, and others that say it's Big Brother keeping an eye on you.

The Media Moguls are whining about losing so much money to piracy and are trying to stop the bleeding before the patient dies. The actual royalties that are paid to the artists is minimal and probably wouldn't buy them a loaf of bread. This isn't so much about protecting the content as it is about protecting the Fat Cats Wallet.

As for Big Brother?... well I think we can pretty much all agree that in this day and age, we're all being watched, whether we like it or not. Paranoia has set in and looking over our shoulders to see what may be coming is a way of life now. Its a shame really. But this is a topic for another thread. Not going to get into that discussion here.

For now Microsoft and the Media have control over how you can view Content Protected Media. You know as well as me that in time the crackers/hackers are going to find a way around pretty much any protection scheme. All they need is time. They have made it a mission... almost a jhad if you want to use that term... to enable protected software/hardware.

The question of whether or not to upgrade to Vista is a choice that each individual has to make on their own. This OS is still in it's infancy and is going to need a lot of updates/fixes before it can be truly called stable.

Yea.. it works.. it does things that the other OS's don't, it's new, but would you go out and buy a new tv/car/stereo, etc... that's just came out? or would you wait till the masses have purchased one and read their beefs/praises.

Personally, I'm gonna wait till Microsoft has worked out more of the bugs and driver issues that seem to plague this OS at the moment. Until most of the Manufactures of software and hardware have fixed these issues, I'm sticking with XP Pro. This OS does just fine for the moment.

 

Well I FOR ONE have not spent my time whining and have actually used Vista, and all of my cds work, all of my dvds work, my xbox 360 works when connected to pc...

It seems to me the only thing that it drm'd is blue ray and hd-dvd and they did that because of legalities.

 

Um, yes, there is a chance ,because he does not know which video card *you* have. He is simply saying that in many many cases, you will not be able to play that content on Vista.

In fact, he is simply presenting *facts*.

And I suppose you have a lot of facts to disprove it all? Cos I certainly haven't seen anything of the sort from you so far.

Could they? Then why don't they do so?
In the Vista thread I created yesterday there were quite a few nice features about Vista mentioned. But no one, absolutely no one, were able to say "all those scary stories are not true. In fact, Vista is perfectly DRM-free, will play back all your legally acquired content without any problems".
No one, except for you, pretended that things were *better* than what Microsoft says. Quite a few people insisted it was *as good* as MS claims, and even more says it's not that good, but still worth using.
But you seem to want to prove that "Even the limitations and shortcomings Microsoft claims Vista has, aren't true."
You seem to be trying to say that even though Microsoft has written countless pages about how Vista deals with DRM content, "it's not an issue". *

Oh, I don't know, a few hundred developer interviews, dozens and dozens of blogs by hundreds of developers? Documentation for the new api's, documentation for how old api's have been reworked. *

From Microsoft. And from people who know what they're talking about.

yes there has.

Your meaning?

*

*

Here here.

Hmm, how strange.... Could it be because not all HD content requires the same policies to be enforced on the users machine? Like, you know, Microsoft openly says is the case? Could it be that you are trying to construct the argument that "DRM is not a problem" by saying that you're able to play DRM-free media just fine?
Yes, I think that might just be the case.

*
they say there's a good chance you'll need to buy a new video card because even cards that have been advertised as "HDCP ready" have not actually supported HDCP. Obviously, the author of that article can't easily tell whether *your* card supports HDCP. He can merely point out that in most cases, it won't. I fail to see what your point is here. Other than indicating that you didn't actually pay much attention when you read the article.


*

I don't feel threatened when people say they prefer Vista, or Mac OS, or Linux, or Dos. (maybe if they say they prefer Windows ME, but that's about it ). And I find it deeply disturbing when a few people care so deeply. I mean, I'm aware of fanboyism, but this is extreme.

Even with the PS3, you don't see threads by people who are practically in tears that their beloved console is being criticised.

 

Usually I skim thru your replies, and lightly reply, to try to avoid conflict. I won't be doing the same today.

So basically he is making facts by making assumptions? Is this what your trying to say?

I've used it, alot of what people are saying isn't true. That's about the biggest fact you can get.

Microsoft has not written a page saying what people are assuming. Microsoft has written some things, but alot of this is things people are assuming to be true.

And like always, you never have proof. And the proof you usually have is more speculation from people qwho call themselves developers.

*

 

* I'm not saying Vista is DRM-free, I'm saying it's probably confined to hd-dvd and blueray and the drm crap is being blown out of proportion.

 

Perfectly Said!!!! LOL

 

Lets not change the subject to global warming, please . (Which I still think it's caused by magnetic shift, but even in a magnetic shift you'd need to take care of your environment, so it's pretty much the same thing).

Or maybe Vista DRM=global warming

 

But honestly...

Jalf, sorry for being so rough, and mean.

But the whole point is, Xbox 360 connected to pc (I only tested it like this to see if the drm was correct a bit ago, I usually have it connected to the monitor), outputted to 720p, isn't downgraded to 480p, shows that hd protected content can be played while not being downgraded.

So some of the stuff being said IS being overblown, whether you want to believe it or not.

I agree with you Jalf, that Vista does have some bad things. it does have DRM.

All I'm saying in this topic is that alot of people are hearing things and are going nuts over them. It's become a huge rumour.

What I want to do with this topic is seperate fact from fiction. I'd like/love to know what is really in Vista, and what isn't.

 

Wow, I still don't get the Vista hate. I beta-tested Vista and now run it as my primary OS. Vista in no way DRM's anything that doesn't REQUIRE DRM from the content provider. Your mp3s and dikvx/xvid files have NO RESTRICTIONS they don't already have on every other OS. Do HD DVDs and Blu-ray discs have DRM? Yes. They do regardless of OS support. Vista DRM managament scheme just makes it easier for the software players to implement. Those same restrictions are present on every device or software that can play that media. The same is true of Apple's DRM protected files and WMV protected files. The DRM is in the files/media you use... Vista just makes playing that software somewhat easier. What, exactly, is the problem?

 

The problem is, people haven't tried Vista, they just hear about DRM and want to complain about it.

 

My problem is that the things I have a problem with in Vista aren't the sorts of things most users will ever care about or understand, except perhaps around the periphery. None the less, I believe they will have a detrimental effect on users. (I'm thinking of requirements for driver signing, combined with the necessity of signed drivers for the 64-bit version of Vista... have I got that right?) Hell, DRM has a detrimental effect on users in the present, and Vista certainly isn't about making it less onerous.

Zellio, your example with the Xbox is exactly what bothers me. The fact that the technology is in there, but that they aren't taking advantage of it... just really bothers me. They slip it in, and it goes right under the radar. If they are never going to use it, then why is it there?

The implementations of some of these hardware DRM things sound to me like they'll interfere with the development of open source drivers. I have every right to be concerned, and even annoy less interested users, if I come to the realization that my concerns are valid. I have vague aspirations of learning to code and writing or poking around in some open source drivers some day. If Microsoft strongarms hardware vendors into creating black boxes, even moreso than they do currently, what happens to that? Further, what happens to open source in general on new hardware?

The threat of media companies reaching in and controlling my computer in some manner, just because they decide they want to (open source worries aside), is obnoxious, and revolting. I'm not especially worried that they will. I maintain that they should not be allowed. I'd much rather have no Blu-Ray and no HD DVD, than support for those, and the scenario I think I'm looking at, even if it doesn't affect me directly in this generation of tech.

 

Heh, that IS something to be worried about. Either they did just implement it for legal sake like I said, or they are planning something....

 

Just to be CLEAR. As someone that worked in several major recording studios here in Los Angeles working on quite a few big records of the 90s, "recording studios" have nothing to do with this. People working in recording studios have all sorts of opinions on file sharing and copyrighted content. This (and I dont know anything about Vista personally but was quite upset when Napster was stopped) has everything to do with executives in the record companies. Very different people than in the studios. These are bean counters that dont usually even have a HISTORY working in the music biz. Yeah theres some artists on their sides but they dont make the rules either. Just the record companies (that were already ripping off artists before file sharing so I dont understand any artist that sides with them).

It annoys me to no end what theyve done (the record companies) in light of new technologies on teh internet. Suing their own customers one by one!! I wont go further on this but just so people out there dont get the impression that anyone in the recording industry automatically sides with the record companies who are without a doubt a huge part of why Vista may have measures regarding this stuff. I am REALLY uninformed on Vista but am feeling like I wont be pleased. Well see.


Oh and what in the world is the evidence that Global Warming is caused by the magnetic shift?!?

Sorry but I just cant watch people saying such innacurate things with nothing to back it up without commenting esp when those things get heard by many many people.

 

I guess my view is that DRM, in one form or another, is here to stay. I don't like it, I'd rather not have it, but I want my Blu-ray discs, etc. so I'll put up with it.

Given that, I would much rather have a DRM system like AACS or protected wmv than the "protection" Sony put on some of their CDs, which amounted to a root-kit with major system-harming potential. Yes, the potential for abuse exists, but I would rather accept DRM that does little or no harm than that which can harm my system. So, Vista's methods of supporting DRM don't bother me at all... in fact, I'd rather there was an effective way of implementing DRM (like Vista has) rather than having it hacked onto a system.

 

"Oh and what in the world is the evidence that Global Warming is caused by the magnetic shift?!? "

I know this is a Vista thread, but I've done a LOT of research on global warming both for personal interest and academic pursuit. I've presented to a few public schools even. Surely there is evidence for this far-fetched tale?

 

Meh. The DRM in Vista can be activated at any time. You aren't experiencing it because Microsoft, etc. don't want you to get a bad taste initially. If it exists, they will use it to increase profits. Right now, there are too few early-adopters who'll piss their pants if things don't work. And they're already not working. Vista is fully enabled to take advantage of these "technologies". Tell me who's getting screwed... the media companies, or the consumer who bought an HDTV/High Def display, and just expects it to display high definition video?

 

Doesn't a SoundCard defeat the purpose of DRM? LOL

Can't explain but .....
Those who understand what I'm saying will LOL too.

 

microsoft sells stuff to consumers before it has been fully tested to work out all of the bugs so that they can get it out sooner and make more money. It's part of their business strategy. I'm worried that if i buy it when it comes out it's gonna b riddled with bugs, as every other MS OS has been on release. I'm sure that It'll work great in 3 or 4 years once they've released a couple of service packs.

 

"Doesn't a SoundCard defeat the purpose of DRM? LOL"

Don't you mean that DRM defeats the purpose of a sound card?

 

I think this is the business strategy of MOST consumer electronics companies now. Sony does it, Im sure they ALL do it. What I dont understand is how with big demand items, theres never enough to meet demand (like the video game stuff. )

Think of how many people are just desparate to get the newest thing. I think its as much consumers fault as it is the companies.

There are some "theories" about the correlation, but much more evidence that points to obvious things relating to our activities. Unfortunately there are a LOT of people talking about a LOT of things. Also, we have a government and a lot of energy companies that have done more to spin the Global Warming topic (including scientists info getting "changed") than I think Microsoft has done to try to convince us how great their OS always is.

The magnetic shift is an interesting thing though that humans will at some point have to deal with (well if were around long enough).

 

Vista can send "anonymous usage statistics" to Microsoft and it's alliliated companies.

*

Or some of those Vista users agree with the statements.

Well, I have Linux, so thank you for the permission to be vocal. I did use Vista for a time, just so I could safely recommend it to friends and family. I didn't have any troubles with DRM, because I only used Vista. I didn't try and connect the system to anything else or play any remotely suspicious like content. I didn't quit using Vista because of DRM, I quit using it because it was useless.

 

I read 2 long articles on the new OS. After spending 20 minutes reading and waiting for the reasons why I need to upgrade, I got NOTHING!

OOps, one thing, it's cool eye candy. Eye candy is cool for another person maybe, not me.

For double the price and hardware upgrades required, I will still be waiting for the additional goods.

Goods to me? Wireless internet, DVD burning, faster start-ups, easy software interoperability, no computer freezing, and when it's tuned and configured, and working, I LEAVE IT ALONE, and enjoy!

Some people like working on cars, and some people just like driving a car that works.

 

Let's keep this discussion on-topic and out of the realm of personal insults/attacks, please. I am referring to the earlier posts in this thread, in particular.

 

Well, if you've ever written software before, you'll know there's no such thing as "fully tested". Achieving perfect coverage in software verification is impossible, and the best thing we can do is achieve "acceptable coverage" for any software released. Of course, in something as complicated as an operating system, there are serious bugs and vulnerabilities even after acceptable coverage has been achieved. So while I don't think it's their business strategy to make their flagship product before they're fully prepared---trust me when I say MS they took their time with Vista, going so far as to scratching the first build based on XP to the current build which is based off 2003---I certainly agree with the bugs and service packs. This is why I dislike MS's EULA so much, so people outside the corporation really have no chance of fixing any of these inevitable bugs that result.

Well I won't give a rousing advertisement for anything I haven't used yet. I'll try to install Vista Enterprise (x64) this weekend, and see if there's anything that stands out. So stay tuned.

As for Jalf, sorry buddy nothing for your post. I read through half of that and realized you were just chopping up Zellio's post and answering it in syllables, not really providing any info up to the standard of your usual postings. And I'm not going to waste my time to convince a skeptic --- it's a free country, and if you can't convince yourself to give Vista a try then nobody will.

 

Look forward to hearing about it, particularly how you find it with other software, whether anything leaps out as "Oh my word how did I ever do without this" (while I've seen quite a lot about how it has better paint programs and such built in, since most of those get replaced by programs written to just be that, I'm not so interested)

Um, that's totally illogical. I might give vista a try at some point, but right now I see no reason to, reference my above note, if someone points something out that I think would be great it might push me to try it. Right now this seems like more microsoft bloatware for little/no benefit.

 

The reasoning is two-fold here Arla. One, if you were already vehemently arguing against the adoption of Vista for your personal use (and I'm not saying you are), and/or giving out specific reasons why Vista would be a bad choice of OS on the forums while refuting all claims to the contrary, then it would be a pretty pointless attempt to convince you otherwise. Maybe if I was a used car salesman, I would be able to change the mind of someone who's already made the decision. But um, I'm not

Two, even if my masterful thesis on 10 reasons why Vista is a great OS somehow convinced you that it is indeed a great OS, if you can't be bothered to try it out by either buying it or downloading the 2GB file from MS, then there's nothing I can say to change that. The same goes for people who, for whatever reason, just don't like new software or hardware. If they can't be convinced to try it for themselves before rendering summary judgment, then nobody will.

Hope that explains my views a bit better Arla
As for the Vista report, I'm still dl'ing the file so it'll take a little time. But PM me in a few days if you want to know any specifics.

 

"I read 2 long articles on the new OS. After spending 20 minutes reading and waiting for the reasons why I need to upgrade, I got NOTHING!

OOps, one thing, it's cool eye candy. Eye candy is cool for another person maybe, not me."

Yeah, that's what I understood too after reading a few articles in Tom's Hardware and various other sites. A while ago I was in the same boat as you, but after I tried Vista, my opinion changed as I noticed a few things.

MS's notion of an easy-to-use (and thus more productive) OS seems to be about improving the usability of the user interface. It is, after all, the only medium through which the user interacts with the computer. Making it more graphically oriented is a strategy that they alone have adopted (unlike Linux) as it allows them to make the OS easier to use. Introducing our grandmothers to the Linux terminal or MSDOS would probably end in disaster (kernel meltdown!!!), but using a GUI lets the OS become more usable as we are more adept at recognizing visual cues and interacting with them rather than remembering a series of text commands.

So improving the UI is really the best thing they could have done besides improving various performance aspects (which also allow you to do things faster). I agree that flashy lights and crap like that is of no use to most of us, especially in the light of XP, but from the looks of the GUI in the form of Aero, Microsoft's Vista has done more than that. They've added faster search functions which are easily accessible, and in general everything is easier to navigate, which means that, in a graphically oriented interface, the user wins by doing more in less time. The fact that Vista also refreshes the UI makes the user's experience more enjoyable while at the same time a little more productive.

Of course, there is the other approach of viewing Vista as nothing more than an improvement of the interface.

 

Heh, I know. Nothing in my post was worth replying to.
After I posted it I figured it'd have been better to just not bother. I don't usually give up on a discussion, as you may have noticed *.

Buh... You really believe that?
Haven't you ever been convinced by others to try something new and different?
Have *every* experience in your entire life been on your own initiative?
If so, I can only say you've led a very different life from me.
I tend to listen to advice from others quite often. Sure, in the end, I'm the only one who can make decisions on my behalf, but that doesn't mean I can't consider input and suggestions from others.
As I tried to say in my (now for some reason closed?) Vista skeptic thread, I do keep an open mind, and I would never have asked for reasons to try Vista if I had already made up my mind.

Oh, almost forgot the reason I popped into this thread again.
Has anyone else read this
Looks like Carmack isn't so thrilled about Vista.
Funnily enough, to him it doesn't seem to be the "usual" complaints about DRM. It's just that there's no reason to switch.

bc135: But how much of the improved eyecandy really makes the OS easier to use? Is the start menu easier to navigate? Does transparency really make it easier to use the OS? The fancy 3d side view when you alt-tab?
If you want to look at how the GUI can be improved usability-wise, look to the Mac's. Sure, their OS has a lot of flaws, some of them pretty serious, but they understand how to make a GUI easy to use.
(Hell, for that matter, Linux has got a few things right too. Among other things, the realization that "yes, people like GUI's, but if you don't make a decent command line terminal available too, you'll end up *hindering* a lot of people."
There are quite a few things that are *harder* to navigate under Vista. One simple example could be all the control panels and configuration windows they've moved around for no other reason than to look different from XP. That is not intuitive to users coming from XP. Another is the lack of a button to go to the parent folder in Explorer. Here are a few more.
I'll be the first to admit I haven't used Vista much (used it a bit back in RC2), but one thing I noticed was that it was *not* easier to use than XP. Different, occasionally. And yes, some control panels has been improved. Others have gone the opposite way. And most have gone, well, sideways. They're no better or worse than they used to be. Just different.

 

You're not replying cause you got owned, and your not man enough to admit it.

And I love your attitude. If you can't win you run away . Or you say you don't care. Either way, you never ever back up your 'facts' with links.

 

Zellio, I reckon you should prolly heed Chrisyano's warning.

 

Hum.

If it's gotten to the point that you can't tell someone what kind of an attitude they have, then maybe you should just put tape over each of our mouths and stick us all in our own seperate little room with rainbows and happy clouds on it, since their will be conflict.

***

Saying something bad about a person's attitude isn't bad in effect. I mean, if you guys want to call me an angry person (at times) go right ahead. I am that.

I'm also other things too. But I don't take conflict well.

***

 

Fair enough, I can't afford to bother with Vista, sure I can get a free download to try it (from what you say, I've not seen such a link, but I've never looked for it) but I have to believe it's to try and thus I'll still not be able to afford to buy Vista.

Two, I've yet to see a compelling reason for it, I do applaud microsoft for continuing to produce a better UI, but as such it's not worth anything like the price that microsoft seems to want to charge me for it.

 

Zellio, calm down. Same with everyone else. Chrisyano's right; no need to attack other people's character in any way, and if it continues to be done (by anyone) I or someone else will close the thread.

That said, I have been using Vista since the day after Beta 2 became available, on several different machines, with both the x64 and x86 versions of every major release (Beta 2, RC1, RC1TR, RC2, and RTM). I'm actually in Vista right now typing this reply. And I frankly still am not impressed; nay, I actually strongly dislike it in many respects. Well, in two respects - DRM and performance.

First up, DRM. I actually have proof of this; a CD I ripped into MP3 with iTunes in XP less than a month ago on a different computer will not play in WMP on Vista because it claims I don't have the appropriate rights - and that truly makes no sense at all. It might just be an error with WMP, but it's DRM-related nonetheless.

The second thing I take major issue with in Vista is it's performance. The performance is atrociously, deplorably, inexcusably bad. Boot up, shut down, and program launch times, multitasking performance, and especially game framerates are all worse in Vista than in XP. Much worse. And while that was almost acceptable on a Pentium M, it's not an Athlon 64 X2. All the useless pretty crap they added does nothing but slow the whole kit and kaboodle down. If they wanted to add pretty crap, the should have taken a lesson from Apple and...well, done it well so that it didn't slow everything down. I'm not a programmer; I don't know why OSX's pretty animations and transparencies run, slight pun intended, like glass while Vista's run like molasses. But certainly someone at Microsoft should be a programmer, and should know? And the gaming performance - what can I say? I had an average of a 50-60% drop in framerates over XP on my I9300's Go6800. A more merciful 20-30% on my new 8800GTS, but that's a card designed for Vista, using newer drivers on Vista than on XP no less. Seems kind of wonky to me...

 

Which cd was this?

I have over 200 cds, if I have it I could try burning it and seeing if it gives me the same error.

It would be odd that it would give you this error, since burning to mp3 would get rid of drm. Of course Windows would know what the file is by what file size it is, so wouldn't that make drm pointless anyway? Just rip to flac or add one second to the mp3 and you basically trick vista, if this happens to alot of people...

 

This thread is remaining open because no doubt there are a number of members who want to read about Vista and others' opinions on it. It is just barely hanging on by a thread though.

If any more posts have to be edited, this thread will be shut down immediately.

 

Ok guys, I've installed Vista Enterprise in a separate partition and now I can dual boot into Vista.

Initial impressions and issues:

1) The memory used by Vista is roughly double that of XP. I now use approx. 650 MB of my RAM when idle, as opposed to 300 for XP. I notice no significant speed hits in terms of opening programs or games*. I do notice that with IE7 and Windows Explorer open, my mem usage reaches 800MB.

2) The interface is much improved, and I'm not talking about just the Aero transparency. I can now use WIN+TAB to navigate through my open windows using the new parallel windows switching functionality. Also, when I run my cursor over the tabs on the taskbar, I get realtime thumbnail popups that gives me a glimpse of whats in the window. The sidebar and gadgets, obviously OSX inspired, are pretty and come standard with a clock and a active desktop-like slideshow of picture thumbnails. I added a performance meter to check my system resources. Hopefully more useful gadgets come out, perhaps hooked onto applications such as Visual Studio 8. I suspect features such as these are the reason for the added RAM overhead.

3) I'm having problems running some of my XP programs in the other partition. Some of these problems are associated with the new permissions system in Vista. While it seems like a good idea to prevent common users from hurting themselves, I actually found it a hassel to have to manually set full permissions for programs and folders. However this should be a one time deal for installed programs. Another problem seems to be that if I use certain programs with Vista, say...Steam for CounterStrike...it doesn't recognize me as the same user. So if the software is has some kind of real time copyright protection, it will not see me as the original purchaser and make a fuss about it. I probably need to migrate my XP profile onto Vista...still looking into this one.

4) Sleep mode, which seems to be some sort of hybrid standby/hibernate, allows the computer to boot up much faster than hibernating. I hardly ever turn my computer off though, so not sure how handy this will be.

*5)Drivers: I managed, thanks to the Asus Vista thread by Ken (and Bender), to find many of the Vista 64 drivers that didn't come standard with the OS. However, I suspect these drivers are not optimized, and frame rates in games such as CounterStrike drop by roughly 20%. I am also looking for some other drivers, such as the BisonCam driver for my integrated 1.3MP camera. Will be looking more into this as well.

That's all my first impressions for now. If you have any specific questions post em or PM me.

 

Thanks for posting your experiences, Gator! Very helpful indeed.

 

Well, I guess gatordude just spoke to Jalf for me. I'm sure that performance will reach it's promised potential once revised drivers are released. Personally if I were getting Vista right away I would wait until the first Service Pack, unless it could be downloaded for free. Vista just needs time to mature.

 

Few things I need to add:

1) I always took FireFox's integrated grammar/spell checking features for granted. IE7 does not have this...argh going to have to DL a plugin probably.

2) The search functionality is much improved, it now searches the word or partial word you type in real time, and you can search almost anywhere ranging from the Start Menu to Windows Explorer to IE7. The results come much quicker as well.

3) I have not done a timed test yet, but I do believe Vista boots up just as fast if not faster than XP on my laptop. This is without using ReadyBoost, something I will try in the future with my 1GB flash card that I got over Christmas.

 

We'll see, but so far, the message from both ATI and NVidia seems to be "this is as good as it's going to get". Even Microsoft has acknowledged that there may be a performance loss in DX9 games, IIRC. (And before anyone asks, I don't have any links to the articles where they said this. Can't bookmark everything when I read it )

Still, at the rate GPU's are improving, 20% performance loss won't matter for long.

 

Ok guys, here's a pic of the parallel window switching in action:

 

gatordude123: Thanks, very useful stuff.
What I find silly about that window switching scheme is that there seems to be absolutely no reason why it has to have the 3d perspective effect. Sure, it looks cool, but it makes every window harder to read. Form over function, really. Apple just puts them side by side, so you can actually *see* all the windows equally well. That makes it easier to use, rather than simply looking nice.

That's right. I don't.
It'd be pretty sad if anyone *did* care about a friggin' operating system, don't you think? It's not like anyone's life depends on it. It's not like it's going to change the world. And it's not like it has *any* impact on my life or yours. So tell me again why *should* anyone "care".
Especially when faced with a constant stream of personal attacks, I really don't see why I *should* care about a piece of software.

Don't I? Let's count.
In this thread, you have posted one link. Which was to an article which criticised Vista, and your point was only to say you disagreed with it, so that can hardly be considered as backing up your 'facts'. That means 0 (zero) links for you.
Me? Two links, in the very post you replied to.

2 vs 0? That's, um, an improvement of #inf percent over you.

I rest my case.

 

Aside from whatever visual appeal this scheme may have for users, it also allows for smooth scrolling with the mouse wheel or arrow keys between windows. So if you were to have 20 windows open (pretty common sometimes when working on a coding project), you could scroll through them all easily. The visual quality on the switching screen is actually pretty good, you can't read anything less than say size 10 font but it definitely allows you to make out the contents pretty well. The jpeg I posted doesn't do it enough justice...I'd upload a less compressed image but ImageShack doesn't like that and my upstream bandwidth is pretty awful.

Also, Vista does have a side by side view, although it gets cramped once there are too many windows present:



Oh and here's a thumbnail preview of a window in the taskbar.