NationStates Jolt Archive

So, my grandfather recently had a whole lot of trouble with his computer, and thought his version of Windows wasn't installed properly. He decided to just go all the way and buy Windows Vista (Insert little TM here). That wasn't the problem, as he later found out. His computer is back up, and he decided to give me Vista as a present. I'm debating whether or not to put it on my computer right now, and I was wondering how many of you have Vista? Poll coming soon. I currently have Windows XP.

I'm liking it so far. It's not too bad.

I've got it, and like it.

its not worth the hassle of installing yet IMHO

What do you use your computer for ?
Is prettyness is important to you ?
Do you mind being treated like a little kid that needs to confirm and reconfirm everything (unless you disable/modify some security features) ?

I've had it for over a year now and I am quite happy with it. I find it much more user-friendly than XP although it took a little getting-used-to. Everything about it makes a lot of sense to me and I like it much better than XP, which I liked very much.

I haven't had any problems with it yet, which I think is good considering I've had it over a year. My last computer (with XP) started freaking out by this point.

I was initially frustrated with the fact that a lot of things aren't Vista-compatible yet, but I've found a way to override that. Download the XP version to the desktop, then right-click the icon. On the list of options pick "run as administrator" and it will work fine.

It may be a hassle to reinstall an OS on your computer, but you could give it a try and revert back later - Vista has the option to run as a previous OS, too.

What do you use your computer for ?
Is prettyness is important to you ?

Nah. If it can run my mixture of abandonware, Roguelikes, and bargain bin games, I'm good :D.

Nah. If it can run my mixture of abandonware, Roguelikes, and bargain bin games, I'm good :D.

Then I think that, at this time, XP is better for you.

And as to the poll: I run a mixture of Vista business, XP pro and varying flavours of linux. I also have a virtual machine with win 98se.

I should installl BeOS/Haiku for fun, but hey - computers are supposed to be a tool - not a playground ;)

I've been using it on/off since the beta stage, and using it full time since roughly last April/May, and going back to use an XP machine frustrates me because, as with most things, once you're used to it and and you've got it set up it's really far superior to XP.

I'm waiting until everyone fixes the stuff that gets broken with any new OS release. Hopefully it won't take as long as OS X did.

Dont Install It!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've Got It And Am Using It Right Now!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do Not Install It!!!!!!

I Cannot Convey This Enough Do Not!!!! Its The Most Annoying System In The World!!! Dont Do It!!!!

Dont Install It!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've Got It And Am Using It Right Now!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do Not Install It!!!!!!

I Cannot Convey This Enough Do Not!!!! Its The Most Annoying System In The World!!! Dont Do It!!!!
Erm... Any particular reason? Specific examples?
if you're upgrading, do check your hardware will be ok with it.

i use it (but with a new laptop that came with it), and i have no complaints at all... actually i think it might be better than XP for me. one or two programs aren't that happy, but its ok
Already checked. My computer *should* be okay with it.

TIMEWARP!

if you're upgrading, do check your hardware will be ok with it.

i use it (but with a new laptop that came with it), and i have no complaints at all... actually i think it might be better than XP for me. one or two programs aren't that happy, but its ok

Dont Install It!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've Got It And Am Using It Right Now!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do Not Install It!!!!!!

I Cannot Convey This Enough Do Not!!!! Its The Most Annoying System In The World!!! Dont Do It!!!!


Uh. Why? Not that I'm attempting to disagree with you... after all, I can't disagree with you if you don't even support your argument... if you don't even have an argument rather... rationale would be nice!

Dont Install It!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've Got It And Am Using It Right Now!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do Not Install It!!!!!!

I Cannot Convey This Enough Do Not!!!! Its The Most Annoying System In The World!!! Dont Do It!!!!

Don't exaggerate. Sure, the constant "are you sure you want to do this" and "administrator priviledge required" messages are annoying, but they can be disabled.

Biggest downside of Vista is direct X 10 that isn't as downwards compatible as MS claims. Which sucks for the stated purpose of abandonware.
And the bloat of course.

Ha ha, very true people very true.

Firstly, it's a pain in the ass. It automatically blocks anything and everything it deems "remotely" harmful. It's blocked dozens of my games, makes viewing the internet a pain.

It causes the computer to run slower. Causes the internet to run slower.

Many programs are not happy with it.

Many items of software such as routers, both wireless and non-wireless, refuse to interact with it; and not many companies have developed the required software to accomodate "their differences"

The update system refuses to allow you access (tried once more today and failed)

All in all it's the same as XP but "shiny" and more hard work and slower. Not good.

It came on my new laptop, there were a few things I liked......like being able to control the volume on each application seperately. I missed some things I used on XP (like the mass uploader for my photography!) and there are things it won't do that I needed it to, like increase the font size of the labels on my short cuts. It also used to ask me inane questions every time I wanted to do something, but hubby made it stop doing that.

I kinda tired of it though, and decided to go back to linux, which is what I used before only using XP for the mass uploader and 2 programs I needed for work........but the linux install failed and I found out that my hard drive is failing (suck!) so I'm getting a new hard drive this week......I'll probably keep the Vista and try to partition my hard drive for linux again......it wasn't my partitioning that borked the laptop in the first place (no matter how much hubby wants that to be true *bitter*) but that the drive was failing and stuff (I'll rationalize).

tl;dr I use linux but Vista is kinda pretty in a superficial way.

I'm on my daughter's laptop now......and XP sucks. I don't know why I ever thought it didn't.

Vista is great...that is if you have a computer strong enough to power a small country.

It is slow, takes about 1/2 a gig of ram to run, definatly not for laptops.
The OS takes up 5 GB.
It is defiantly inferior to XP.
It asks you permission for everything, and it messes up games. if you install new hardware, you have to call windows and wait for over 9000 years for a response, then you type in a hard to hear code to get it working again.

its a waste of time, if you have vista, upgrade to XP (i say upgrade because vista was a downgrade compared to XP)

Vista is great...that is if you have a computer strong enough to power a small country.

It is slow, takes about 1/2 a gig of ram to run, definatly not for laptops.
The OS takes up 5 GB.
It is defiantly inferior to XP.
It asks you permission for everything, and it messes up games. if you install new hardware, you have to call windows and wait for over 9000 years for a response, then you type in a hard to hear code to get it working again.

its a waste of time, if you have vista, upgrade to XP (i say upgrade because vista was a downgrade compared to XP)

See, lol

Vista is great...that is if you have a computer strong enough to power a small country.

Any modern (i.e. up to about 3 years old, probably) computer would be more than capable of running it

It is slow, takes about 1/2 a gig of ram to run, definatly not for laptops.

That's funny, my laptop has 2GB of RAM, so not really an issue.

The OS takes up 5 GB.

So? Is there any new computer that has a hard drive so small that 5GB would be a problem?

It is defiantly inferior to XP.

In what way?

It asks you permission for everything, and it messes up games. if you install new hardware, you have to call windows and wait for over 9000 years for a response, then you type in a hard to hear code to get it working again.

Something I have never encountered, despite having built and rebuilt my previous desktop, with Vista on it.

XP media center, and I haven't lost my Dunmer Spellsword on Morrowind :P

Vista = Not very fresh, slightly fermented with urine, crock.

Why is ME here, and 2000 not here?
Where's Linux?

I use Linux and W2000.

So? Is there any new computer that has a hard drive so small that 5GB would be a problem?

The EEE pc ;) ?
However, an OS for a mere homecomputer taking up 5 gb is ridiculous and reeks of sloppy and inferior programming. The space is there, but the fact it is needed is... odd.

The EEE pc ;) ?
However, an OS for a mere homecomputer taking up 5 gb is ridiculous and reeks of sloppy and inferior programming. The space is there, but the fact it is needed is... odd.

Even 5GB is an exaggeration. My last fresh install was about 3GB, maybe 3.5. Really not a big problem.

I have it. I like it. Yeah, some of it's a little annoying. But DirectX 10 makes up for it IMO.

As far as I understand, Vista is to XP what ME was to Win98. I know that I would gain nothing if I would install Vista on my machine, so I'll just stick with XP.

XP media center, and I haven't lost my Dunmer Spellsword on Morrowind :P
LUCKY! You just have a good memory, unlike moi. *Forgets to reactivate again* YOU LITTLE $#!%^$#@*^$!@^# *Ad Infinitum* :D

What about Win 2k Pro? *sobs* Why always me left out?!?!?! *tantrum*

I like Win2k. It's very stable, has good multi user and networking support, and is quite light on the system. I did use Linux, but these days have some specialist apps that have no Linux equivilents, plus I like my (Windows/Mac only) word processor much more than OOO too.

Any modern (i.e. up to about 3 years old, probably) computer would be more than capable of running it


I just fitted some upgrades to my own system, and now it would run Vista quite happily, but why bother? Even though my PC would run it, it would still slow it down and clog it up with things I don't need or want. I don't see why with software there is this constant drive to make us keep buying new versions, when what we have is tried and tested, and in may ways better than what's being made now.

My laptop came preinstalled with Vista. Having been using Linux for a while before hand I didn't really have a problem with UAC. I was indeed comforted that all the important parts of the OS were strictly protected. My major complaint was all the unnecessary graphics effects. It just made me cringe to think about much extra time was being wasted on startup for all this extra aesthetic crap - not to mention I don't actually like aero. Aero provides no extra functionality, unlike the mac middle-click-thingy, or the alt-tabbing on ubuntu 8, or even virtual desktops.

That said I wasn't very happy when I installed Ubuntu 8. Not sure what they added, but it certainly slowed startup, and the sound conflicts weren't fun either.

I'd probably advise against it (I have vista myself) if you are a gamer because Microsoft did some really stupid stuff which makes it difficult now to play older games on vista, although its getting better. Also its hell if you're a sound techy kind of guy, since they did some really stupid stuff with the sound drivers also.

Biggest downside of Vista is direct X 10 that isn't as downwards compatible as MS claims. Which sucks for the stated purpose of abandonware.
And the bloat of course.

There are always fixes etc.. so your very unlikely these days to get a game that you absolutely cannot run, but yeah its a pain sometimes spending loads of time to get old games to work.

As far as I understand, Vista is to XP what ME was to Win98. I know that I would gain nothing if I would install Vista on my machine, so I'll just stick with XP.
That's not entirely fair. Windows ME didn't really even deserve its own moniker, since it was just 98SE with a few bells and whistles -- it should just have been labelled as 98TE (except that then nobody would have bought it :p).
Any modern (i.e. up to about 3 years old, probably) computer would be more than capable of running it
They'll (probably) be able to run it, but there are a whole heap of PCs from the last few years that will run at a crawl under Vista, whilst running nice and smooth under XP. Vista has some nice features, and it'll be great once it's had a few more months of tweaking (and once baseline PCs catch up to the level of resources that it wants to run smoothly) but there's no real need for anyone to upgrade an old machine to run Vista at this time, especially if their system is running smoothly at the moment.
I currently have Windows XP.
I'm pretty sure it was you that mentioned in a recent thread that your PC wasn't capable of running something (the Spore creature creator thread, maybe?). If that's the case, I'd suggest that you hold off on installing Vista on your current system.

There isn't really a good response in the polls about what operating system I use....

My desktop at home uses XP (it's about 6 years old), my desktop at work runs Fedora and my laptop is a macbook which is dual booted with OSX 10.5 and Gentoo.

So I use windows, mac and linux.

I'm pretty sure it was you that mentioned in a recent thread that your PC wasn't capable of running something (the Spore creature creator thread, maybe?). If that's the case, I'd suggest that you hold off on installing Vista on your current system.

It's one of two things:

1. My Computers been acting up recently, and I suspect it's got something to do with it being over six years old (Plenty of stuff added to it, trust me)

2. My video card. Sucks. Royally.

I dual boot Windows Vista Ultimate and Ubuntu 8.10, both 64-bit. I like them, and they serve me well. Vista is decent for gaming, and I haven't noticed too many issues with backwards compatibility (Daemon Tools didn't work on Vista for a while, but they are up to speed now.)

I have Vista 32bit with Sp1, have a license for 64bit as well but due to not having 4Gb of RAM anymore went for 32bit.

Works a charm, no issues what so ever, any more, it did have teething trouble before patches etc.

I run it without Aero or any desktop effects because they are unnecessary for myself, even if they do work well.

My advice is going to be quite simple on this, if you computer meets the recommended requirements, and then some (just a little above them) go for Vista, there is no reason not to. If less stick with XP.

I'm fed up of people running unpatched versions of Vista and complaining about its sluggishness or crashes, or people who don't meet the requirements and then complain, its plain stupid to base an opinion on a product that isn't fully updated if its software.

/rant

I also dual boot with Ubuntu 8.04 :D Works a charm as well ;)

Just a question is it true that not all programs mainly older programs that ran perfectly on such OS as ME and 98 will not run on Vista? I know this was true in regards to XP and I am just wondering if the same goes for Vista, or will I need a duo core to run seperate operating systems from? (Showing off n00b colours)

Just a question is it true that not all programs mainly older programs that ran perfectly on such OS as ME and 98 will not run on Vista? I know this was true in regards to XP and I am just wondering if the same goes for Vista, or will I need a duo core to run seperate operating systems from? (Showing off n00b colours)

Some programs have/had compatibility issues, but not many and of course Vista features the run program in compatibility mode for <Windows System>.

You don't need a dual core to run more than one operating system, you can always run a virtual system through a program like Virtual PC which Microsoft have released for free to the home market, the download is roughly 40Mb. Or you can dual boot by installing the two systems to seperate partitions/drives in a manner you choose.

I also dual boot with Ubuntu 8.04 :D Works a charm as well ;)
O, rock on!

My advice CM, run. Run and hide. Wait for Windoze 7, it's only like a year away (from Microsoft, so read: 2 years or more).

Perhaps a nice pro-con list:
PROS:

Shiny new interface looks like Mac-on-Crac (Had to use that. No, it does look nice. Like a Mac with color. It has cool transparencies, and nice buttons and stuff. Not much of a fan myself, though, mainly because of the cons, listed below)
Newer OS means possibility of future programs being compatible with Vista or higher. None that I know of yet, though.
Ummm... I suppose better security if you don't disable any features...

And now for the CONS:

Robs system resources. Especially with the new interface running with all the features. If you put it on an XP machine, expect a significant drop in performance.
To extend on the previous, everything is moved. If you are at all used to the way things were, you will find it hard to figure out where things were.
Incompatible with a lot of older programs, even those written for XP. Upgrading will probably mean finding new drivers for all your hardware, and finding replacements for some of your favorite programs.
Any security advantages must be given up in favor of sanity. The Mac guys aren't exaggerating with those commercials. It will ask you to cancel or allow just about everything you do except for saving and loading certain files.

In short, I'm damn close to sucking it up and switching to Linux.

Vista's not too bad. It's actually quite inoffensive. That said, it ain't a ringing endorsement.

My advice CM, run. Run and hide. Wait for Windoze 7, it's only like a year away (from Microsoft, so read: 2 years or more).

Perhaps a nice pro-con list:
PROS:

Shiny new interface looks like Mac-on-Crac (Had to use that. No, it does look nice. Like a Mac with color. It has cool transparencies, and nice buttons and stuff. Not much of a fan myself, though, mainly because of the cons, listed below)
Newer OS means possibility of future programs being compatible with Vista or higher. None that I know of yet, though.
Ummm... I suppose better security if you don't disable any features...

And now for the CONS:

Robs system resources. Especially with the new interface running with all the features. If you put it on an XP machine, expect a significant drop in performance.
To extend on the previous, everything is moved. If you are at all used to the way things were, you will find it hard to figure out where things were.
Incompatible with a lot of older programs, even those written for XP. Upgrading will probably mean finding new drivers for all your hardware, and finding replacements for some of your favorite programs.
Any security advantages must be given up in favor of sanity. The Mac guys aren't exaggerating with those commercials. It will ask you to cancel or allow just about everything you do except for saving and loading certain files.

In short, I'm damn close to sucking it up and switching to Linux.
Do it! Ubuntu is a fine OS.

Do it! Ubuntu is a fine OS.

Ubuntu isn't the only distro. Why not go for Debian, since Ubuntu is based on Debian? Or Fedora or Gentoo or Mandriva...?

Some programs have/had compatibility issues, but not many and of course Vista features the run program in compatibility mode for <Windows System>.

You don't need a dual core to run more than one operating system, you can always run a virtual system through a program like Virtual PC which Microsoft have released for free to the home market, the download is roughly 40Mb. Or you can dual boot by installing the two systems to seperate partitions/drives in a manner you choose.

Ahh well if Vista will run programs that runs well on 98 but wouldn't run on XP then that is good, all the more reason to install it when I get my new computer. If that is how Vista works then I don't think I will need a dual core, I was asking that because I know a guy who used a dual core one processor ran XP and the other had 98 on it for those programs that wouldn't run on XP.

I use XP for it's stable*, quite fast & light OS.

Needs bit too much rebooting, but so does Vista - and by my short hands-on experience I'd say Vista is almost worse.

*
Though, probably due to my...umm...relatively unique install (started its life as a service packless XP on way different hardware) there are some problems with hi-speed USB-II transfers to flash memory media.

I've made my decision everyone. *Dramatic pause*

I'm installing Vista! Woo!

It is slow, takes about 1/2 a gig of ram to run, definatly not for laptops.

heh, i'm on a laptop with 4 gigs of ram right now. and RAID striping. maybe this is why it doesn't seem slow for me >.>

but then my dad has vista on his 2gb ram, less powerful laptop, and its fine for him too.


things i like:

1. better alt-tab (than XP) for faster keyboard working
2. easier wifi setup
3. indexed search is way faster than old searches, even if it does keep reading my HDD all the damn time
4. volume for each program is useful
5. better control over start up processes and services
6. i like its prettyness
7. better power management for laptops

things i don't like:
1. no 'stereo mix' (or equivalent) support for recording what you hear
2. my SLI graphics cards mean i can't clone my desktop when presenting. not a vista problem, i think, but a nvidia one... but i wanted to be grumpy about it :P
3. a very old version of quark xpress doesn't load at all. and photoshop sometimes doesn't like running alongside an old version of dreamweaver.

my recommendations if upgrading/using it:
1. turn off UAC because its fucking annoying
2. do a hardware compatibility test before upgrading
3. search the web for potential issues other people may have with your key programs
4. don't get the 64 bit version. i have the 32 bit version and all is fine. my dad has the x64 and all manner of hardware that works fine for me is a major pain in the ass for him.



all in all, if i had to pay to upgrade i probably would decide to... but only just. for me i didn't have an option when getting a new laptop. so if its free (to the OP) then i would if i were you.

I have XP and probably won't get Vusta until I get my next computer. I've never really used Vista eiter for more than a few minutes becuase someone I know has it. From what I've done it doesn't feel that different. Although it just seems made for a bigger moniter than I have.

my recommendations if upgrading/using it:
1. turn off UAC because its fucking annoying What’s the UAC? Because I have vista and some of it is very annoying, so anything to make it less annoying would be good.

User Account Control. The "are you sure you want to do this?" thing that pops up all the time. You can turn that off.

Thank god, il google it.

I'm installing Vista! Woo!

We'll miss you...

Even 5GB is an exaggeration. My last fresh install was about 3GB, maybe 3.5. Really not a big problem.

Would be nice if they did not require a hard drive/partition of 15-20 GB to even install it.

What a pain in the ass

Ubuntu isn't the only distro. Why not go for Debian, since Ubuntu is based on Debian? Or Fedora or Gentoo or Mandriva...?

*Chears for debian*

If you want a little more getting your hands dirty with still supprising ease for someone with any linux experience I recomend debian

Fedora is a good first time OS as well ... gentoo unless you are experienced i would recomend shying away from for awhile ... it is not too bad with defaults but it can be crazy hard, but crazy powerfull as well

Mandriva is alright, I have kind of kept away from it and SUSE

Dont Install It!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've Got It And Am Using It Right Now!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do Not Install It!!!!!!


I'm pretty sure his installing it won't cause yours to stop working...

I Cannot Convey This Enough Do Not!!!! Its The Most Annoying System In The World!!! Dont Do It!!!!

Unless it already has :rolleyes:

So yeah for me it has come down to this

I have run vista for work, I have run vista at home when it was in beta, I have run it in virtuals in both places.

It comes down to this, the simple fact that I yet have 0 use for it beyond getting an initial feel and troubleshooting (which can be done with virtuals) there is no reason for me to move my primary operating systems on my primary computers over to it

Debian serves me better at work and XP/Debian at home for my non servers

Without a solid reason at this time to go from XP to Vista there is no need to go through the work of a re-install

This coming from someone with free copy's of any microsoft product.

Snip

My advice is going to be quite simple on this, if you computer meets the recommended requirements, and then some (just a little above them) go for Vista, there is no reason not to. If less stick with XP.

Snip

The question becomes why? ... I already have XP installed, stable and a good image of the current setup.

I far exceede the requirements of vista, but I have yet to see a reason for the work. I have run it in the past and have run it at work where it was nessisary for testing and it was fine and all but I do not see a reason to revamp my primary system

There isn't really a good response in the polls about what operating system I use....

My desktop at home uses XP (it's about 6 years old), my desktop at work runs Fedora and my laptop is a macbook which is dual booted with OSX 10.5 and Gentoo.

So I use windows, mac and linux.
Ehhh i am in the same boat but I just picked what I use most

Right now I am at 6 phisical at home 2 at work

1) XP/Debian
2) Debian
3) Debian
4) Vyatta
5)Windows Server 2003
6)Windows Server 2008

At work I have
1)Debian
2)Server 2003


I have more then that virtualized but yeah

I have XP, though right now I'm posting from my family's mac.

Don't get Vista. It's a steaming pile of shit.

Vista was annoying at first, but then again most software is. I have no problem with it, but it still drive my wife nuts sometimes.

The question becomes why? ... I already have XP installed, stable and a good image of the current setup.

I far exceede the requirements of vista, but I have yet to see a reason for the work. I have run it in the past and have run it at work where it was nessisary for testing and it was fine and all but I do not see a reason to revamp my primary system
Sorry for the bump but I feel I have to add to this.

I meant in the context of a new machine that is yet to have an OS installed, as in if purchasing from a shop or if its an option for free, or very similar to the price of XP.

Vista does make sense in the current market even though support for XP has just been extended till 2014.

Since it's already been bumped... I just got my hard drive re-imaged and apparently all the stuff I remembered from 6 months ago being annoying about Vista is superficial and easily turned off, all the other things that annoy me are random software installed by the computer company.

I have to go uninstall all of that now and turn off my desktop spam (I think they are actually widgets or something)..........

my ranks of MS OSes:

best ones:

#1: MS-DOS 5/6: did what promised, came with huge paper manual.
#2: Win XP Pro SP2: runs quite smooth once you remove the nice graphics and isn't as buggy as the penguinhuggers like to think.
#3: Win 2K Pro SP3: is like XPproSP2, but a bit slower.
#4: Win NT4: as the system which sired 2K and XP.

worst ones:

#1: Win98: BSoD.
#2: WinME: Windows Merda Edition. ("merda" in italian, "merde" in french, "mierda" in spanish)
#3: WinCE: Windows Castrated Edition, take Win98 and cut away its testicles if it even had any.
#4: Win95: as the system which sired Win98 and WinME.
#5: WinVista: slow, sluggy resource-eating and DNS-losing sonuvabitch.

Coming in the worst ones' list, Windows 2008 Server, the most expensive ever: you need to buy 10 SERVER licences and 10 machines to put up a bloody mail server, according to a MS-certified teacher of mine.

Don't get Vista. It's a steaming pile of shit.
This.

I'm looking forward to the day when Microsoft realises that what we all want is an operating system with fewer features and we don't need to be treated like five year olds.

Vista = Not very fresh, slightly fermented with urine, crock.

Why is ME here, and 2000 not here?
Where's Linux?

I use Linux and W2000.

Got to agree with ME/2k thing. I personally use 2k on my main comp and XP on laptop (came installed with it). I by far prefer 2k. I do have linux installed too on my main comp... Kind of... It's been broken for 2 years, too lazy to get it fixed as I only had it installed to learn how to use it :rolleyes:

I would strongly suggest againts installing Vista thought. I know no one who has been happy with it thus far, the few friends that used it quickly re-installed XP.

I must say thought that I out of all the windows systems I've used I've had least problems with 2k.

I can't say I like the idea of wasting half a GB of RAM for shiny window management, or of worse-performing drivers due to a poor re-engineering of the driver system for the addition of DRM architecture. (the reason for incompatibility with XP drivers)

As far as the technicalities go, operating system development has not stood still during the last 7 years. XP is outdated (for now, still using it for several Windows programs, though), and Vista has not done anything to catch up with the competition. Meanwhile, Linux and the BSDs have continually improved.

if you're upgrading, do check your hardware will be ok with it.

i use it (but with a new laptop that came with it), and i have no complaints at all... actually i think it might be better than XP for me. one or two programs aren't that happy, but its ok

Only wish I'd had similar experiences. Two catastrophic crashes and it eats ram like some kind of giant alien worm thing.

I have a new PC with Vista. Works perfectly, hasnt crashed ever yet.

But you should know a few things:

Vista has troubles to run old programs, specially old games.
Vista has troubles with drivers from some manufacturers...tis has been mostly solved by now.
Vista requieres a BIG computer. installing it in old wimpy machines may end being frustrating.
Its a very good idea to have all the updates installed.
If you are buying a distro from one special manufacturer (LIKE F*CKING TOSHIBA) be carefull with all the crapware that the manufacturer installs. Sometimes you need to do a clean installation to get rid of all this.
Vista works much better with SP 1 installed
Vista can be tuned (try this only if you know what you are doing !!1!!) to work very VERY good and fast.
DNS can be a problem if you do NOT know how to download stuff the RIGHT way with OUT paying for it.
Microsoft announced Windows 7 for next year.... so this could mean W7 is going to be out probably for 2012 and will be usable in 2014

just remember
dont believe the hype... specially the ZOMG!!1! Vista iz teh crapiste!!1! hype.

So, my grandfather recently had a whole lot of trouble with his computer, and thought his version of Windows wasn't installed properly. He decided to just go all the way and buy Windows Vista (Insert little TM here). That wasn't the problem, as he later found out. His computer is back up, and he decided to give me Vista as a present. I'm debating whether or not to put it on my computer right now, and I was wondering how many of you have Vista? Poll coming soon. I currently have Windows XP.

I'm using Vista right now and I've only had one problem so far. Everything runs smoothly, but I do have 4 gigs RAM.

Over the past 15 years I've used Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME, and now use XP, and I've only had one major problem. Average computer lifetime is ~4 years, with two in use at any time (and yes, when I get a new computer, I transfer over th eimportant stuff form the one being retired).

my ranks of MS OSes:

best ones:

#1: MS-DOS 5/6: did what promised, came with huge paper manual.
#2: Win XP Pro SP2: runs quite smooth once you remove the nice graphics and isn't as buggy as the penguinhuggers like to think.
#3: Win 2K Pro SP3: is like XPproSP2, but a bit slower.
#4: Win NT4: as the system which sired 2K and XP.

worst ones:

#1: Win98: BSoD.
#2: WinME: Windows Merda Edition. ("merda" in italian, "merde" in french, "mierda" in spanish)
#3: WinCE: Windows Castrated Edition, take Win98 and cut away its testicles if it even had any.
#4: Win95: as the system which sired Win98 and WinME.
#5: WinVista: slow, sluggy resource-eating and DNS-losing sonuvabitch.

Coming in the worst ones' list, Windows 2008 Server, the most expensive ever: you need to buy 10 SERVER licences and 10 machines to put up a bloody mail server, according to a MS-certified teacher of mine.

Just a note, I would disagree with your assessment of 2k3 ... with some attention it has a significantly lower commit charge

Your teachers assessment of 2k8 is also off base and silly you can do it on a single machine with single licence

Even with best practices in place it would be only 3 computers (2 domain controllers and the exchange server)

We are already running an internal 2008 exchange server, Terminal server, and domain controllers (the 2k8 DC's are required for licensing for TS)

This coming from a MCSE who does this stuff in the real world

Sorry for the bump but I feel I have to add to this.

I meant in the context of a new machine that is yet to have an OS installed, as in if purchasing from a shop or if its an option for free, or very similar to the price of XP.

Vista does make sense in the current market even though support for XP has just been extended till 2014.

In this case I happen to agree for bought machines

In the past 20 years CPU /hdd/ gfx cards have improved their performances by upto 400%

So why does vista run so slowly? :headbang:


Boris

<<running Fedora Linux on 2 boxes and DSL on another

Vista doesnt run slow on my computer. Just get 4GB of RAM.

Vista doesnt run slow on my computer. Just get 4GB of RAM.

I am running 8 on mine ... the question becomes why?

What benefits that I will used does it give me to justify the increased overhead?

I am running 8 on mine ... the question becomes why?

What benefits that I will used does it give me to justify the increased overhead?

I dunno. I use it because it came with the computer and runs my games (newer ones anyway, haven't tried installing my old ones yet).

I dunno. I use it because it came with the computer and runs my games (newer ones anyway, haven't tried installing my old ones yet).

Those are benefits for you sure but Not necessarily for me

And they do not appear to be virtues of the product itself simply benifits of the situation ...

Those are benefits for you sure but Not necessarily for me

And they do not appear to be virtues of the product itself simply benifits of the situation ...

Yeah, I wasn't actually trying to argue in favour of Vista, just trying to be funny on the assumption that most people would think 4GB is way too much.

Yeah, I wasn't actually trying to argue in favour of Vista, just trying to be funny on the assumption that most people would think 4GB is way too much.

Heh I am a server admin I run 3 8gb machines at home and I break 64 gb in some of my machines at work ;) I get used to it lol

Though 4 is still high for desktops its becoming more and more reasonable in todays market really crazy what you get used to

Heh I am a server admin I run 3 8gb machines at home and I break 64 gb in some of my machines at work ;) I get used to it lol

Though 4 is still high for desktops its becoming more and more reasonable in todays market really crazy what you get used to

My 4GB is a laptop...

My 4GB is a laptop...

I have no need for a 4gb laptop 2 is enough in mine

More then that I put in my desktops they have the ability to actually really use that much realistically

I have no need for a 4gb laptop 2 is enough in mine

More then that I put in my desktops they have the ability to actually really use that much realistically

If you've ever played Neverwinter Nights 2, you'll know why I wanted the best laptop I could find.

If you've ever played Neverwinter Nights 2, you'll know why I wanted the best laptop I could find.

I have but again on the desktop ... and even then with OS it does not float above 2 GB actually used.

With virtuals I can soak up the rest of my ram but that is only because their performance can be kept up with the 6 extra non primary OS drives I have in the machine

Without the ability to have 8 cores in my primary (4 in my secondaries) and hard drive space I would not need neer that amount of ram

I have but again on the desktop ... and even then with OS it does not float above 2 GB actually used.

With virtuals I can soak up the rest of my ram but that is only because their performance can be kept up with the 6 extra non primary OS drives I have in the machine

Without the ability to have 8 cores in my primary (4 in my secondaries) and hard drive space I would not need neer that amount of ram

Nah, I don't think it's really the RAM that NWN2 needs. That's not really what I was going for. My old laptop was really bad at running it, but it didn't meet the processor or graphics card requirements. Those were my main concerns (I would have bought a desktop, but I don't have the space to put it in).

Vista.

Hmm, I loved it, hated it, and loved it again. After the bugfixes and SP1, (and a horrible fault with the automatic updater spent 4 months looking for a fix for) I can now conclude that it is fine.