Windows vista?


#1

So, I’m thinkin about getting a new pc, but what i like from best buy all comes with vista on it… I’ve heard bad things, but have also heard that most of it’s issues people had when it first came out, have been fixed. I was wondering if any of you guys with more knowledge than I, could confirm this?

PS. I did do a search, and the only thread i found that seemed to address the issue was very long, and also unused since like Feb, so I made this, rather than necro’ing that one.

thanks


#2

just got a new dell laptop with vista and 4gigs of ram no complaints


#3

I built my own rig with Vista x64 on it. I actually heard from someone at my school that the 64-bit version had less issues than the 32.

I’ve had minimal problems with it. To be honest, the only problem I had was GameTap not running a few games. Other than that, no real complaints.


#4

Id say Vista isnt worth it. Most of the new stuff is just bloating it, and i have yet to seen someone willing to sacrifice 1gig+ in ram just to run the damn OS.
XP still beats it, hands down.


#5

I’ll make it simple: Winners don’t do Vista. While entirely possible that you may not have any problems yourself, the overwhelming majority of people just have problems. There are workarounds for lots of the problems, but in general it isn’t worth the trouble. As a computer tech, Vista is as annoying as it gets. There are tons of problems that seem simple to fix, but Microsoft won’t let you actually use the computer like you want to so in the end you have to just wait on Microsoft to get their act together. I DUN LIEK IT ONE BIT ARR


#6

The computer I bought came with Vista. I heard all the bad stuff being said about it, but when I first started using it, I was a fan. Visually it was nice, loaded quick, had some extra bells and whistles, all that shit. Eye candy pretty much.

Performance wise, I’ve had no problems with it. The only issue would be trying to use Photoshop CS or CS2. For some reason [in my case], it wouldn’t load as fast as it should’ve, but that was remedied when I got CS3 from my school [runs perfect].

All in all, the only way you’re going to know if it’s right for you is if you give it a test run. Do your usual shit on it and see how it performs. If it’s the same as XP in most cases, there’s no need to change. If there’s too many snags that you’re running into where it becomes a pain, then just install another OS [Ubuntu is a free alternative].

*There’s been some talk about opening a program and Vista making sure you actually want to execute that. For me it’s not an inconvenience, and I heard that you can change the settings somewhere, but I’ve never bothered as I rarely run into it.


#7

In the end, it really depends on what your gonna be using the computer for. Development tools may suffer (I heard that visual studio had issues on vista), but if it’s for surfing, playing some of the newer (and quite a few of the older) games out there, there is no real problem with it.

I was never a fan of the extra flash XP or Vista included, so I always turn them off. Saves a bit of the processing power and consumes a bit less RAM just sitting on the desktop.

As for the constant confirmation of running an EXE, yeah, it’s there. It’s a bit annoying at times, but after a while you don’t even realize it’s there. And yes, you can disable it somewhere (I hadn’t bothered to look for it though).


#8

Vista is fine. I got it for free off of my schools download service. The only issues I’ve had with it where the result of my own wrongdoings.

Some Apps refuse to work though.


#9

Isn’t worth “it”? It comes on the computers, your statement makes it sound like someone would be buying it extra.

I’m willing to bet money that the majority of people telling you bad things about Vista haven’t used it.


#10

Thanks a lot for the replies, guys.


#11

I’ve been running it for four months. I’ve had zero issues thus far. Course, I’m running Home Premium.


#12

Im running the same since it was released with 2gigs and the only issue ive had was with an old printer that vista didnt support. I dont know why so many people have problems with it.


#13

I like using Vista myself. Honestly, it’s not a problem for everyday users. While for others, they may have compatibility issues. For myself, the only problem I’m having with Vista is using Rosetta Stone. Otherwise, my pc itself has plenty of power to run the extras.

So in the end, it just comes to what you need it for.


#14

all my emu’s and pc games work. been using 64 bit ultimate for months.


#15

Honestly I think people continually reiterate the problems the OS had upon release. Maybe they don’t realize that most of the major problems have been fixed. Either way, with a properly equipped system Vista is pretty awesome. I was dragged kicking and screaming into Vista from XP and now I honestly cannot imagine going back.


#16

Thats true. What isnt true is that Vista is awesome. 2+ gigs of ram for the OS? You gotta be fucking shitting me.
That, lack of/buggy drivers, visual crap hogging resources, shitty compatability with pretty much everything and its grandma makes Vista one of the worst OSes around. Avoid!

I have quite honestly not seen a single reason to get Vista, is there one? And dont say directX 10, all games that actually matters run fine on XP with 9.0.


#17

Vista is what Xp should have been.

As a systems admin who’s been running vista ultimate in a domain environment for the past 9 months I’ve had not one system crash or blue screen of death. At first I was a bit skeptical myself but after using vista in a work environment on a daily basis I don’t think I can go back to Xp. I am now working on building a Quad core system for home use and plan on building it with Vista Ultimate 64 due to very high approval over at one of the best tech forums on the net http://hardforum.com

Sure the system may require a bit more memory but you have to stop thinking of system memory as a resource and start thinking of it as a a cache. Just like the level 1 and level 2 cache on your CPU, system memory is yet another type of high-speed cache that sits between your computer and the disk drive.

And the most important rule of cache design is that empty cache memory is wasted cache memory. Empty cache isn’t doing you any good. It’s expensive, high-speed memory sucking down power for zero benefit. The primary mission in the life of every cache is to populate itself as quickly as possible with the data that’s most likely to be needed-- and to consistently deliver a high “hit rate” of needed data retrieved from the cache. Otherwise you’re going straight to the hard drive, and if you have to ask how much going to the hard drive will cost you in performance, you can’t afford it.

The Vista feature you are all looking to disable is called UAC or User Account Control. Most people think that this is a vista only feature but this is actually in most operating systems including Ubuntu and OSX. Want to perform an administrative task (possibly dangerous task)? Sure, Vista will ask you for your administrative password, why? So that Malware, Spyware and Virus’s are not allowed to propagate on your system without you knowing. Once you’ve been using your system for a couple of days UAC is behind the scenes, it’s just the initial configuration that is a bit annoying.

Most new systems now days have standard Dual core or higher processors and at least 3-4 gigs of memory. System memory is so cheap right now that there is no reason not to spend the extra cash for 4gb of memory. I’m currently running a a Core 2 Duo, 3gb of memory and Vista ultimate 32 at work and it works great.

Vista uses a feature called Superfetch which ultimately loads the programs you use the most into memory so that they will load faster. If you do want your vista system to handle memory like an Xp system you can disable Superfetch.

If you are looking to buy a new system and looking for a fresh windows experience by all means give Mojave… Err… Vista a try.


#18

Have you thought about the competetion? As in Linux or Mac?

I personally have a Mac. I also happen to have Windows XP. How? Macs can have both. You can even have Mac+Vista on the same system. I only use the XP side for emulators and some other small software, but for everyday use its Mac all the way.

My friend uses Linux and finds it superior to any Windows OS he has ever used. I dont have personal experience with it though.


#19
  1. Honestly, as cheap as RAM is getting the RAM hog argument doesn’t really hold water any more. Trexid’s previous post pretty much explains what I was going to cover with the RAM thing. I’ve seen Vista run great on a gig of RAM. Plus, necessary hardware upgrades are sort of inevitable.

  2. I’ve had zero compatibility problems with any drivers. In fact, Vista will detect and install software for things that XP would not. I’ve also had zero compatibility problems with software/games/etc that I’ve tried to run thus-far.

  3. Most (if not all) of the visual resources can be turned off if you don’t want them.

As far as reasons why, I find it much more streamlined than XP. It’s a lot easier (and faster) to get to what you need. Also, people need to take into account that official support for XP will end at some point in the next few years.

I see compelling reasons to both switch to Vista and stay with XP. But your statements are terribly generalized and pretty uninformed regarding Vista.


#20

Well as not to say there isn’t problems, I’m on Vista on my laptop and I have had trouble integrating into my universities network, and using some older devices.

It depends on how old the systems you will be interacting with are. Also, Vista is a quirky beast. With all default settings I have several friends with Vista, and it seems to be pretty random as to which of us can and cannot use the free wireless found at my school. (Some even the same exact make and model laptop with varying levels of success.)

I takes some getting used to, but it doesn’t bother me anymore, I just have had networking issues/headaches, that I haven’t with XP.