They are still upgrading vista so we have to wait until a reasonable stable version is out. Currently microsoft has lots of trouble with vista with new bugs being found everyday or so.
How many Vista haters around here actually tried Vista? I owed vista for a few months and used it on my vista read pc. How many Vista haters around here actually tried Vista for other purposes than just games? Used it for graphic/web design and general purpose activities (email, web, etc..) Didn't play one game on it as I don't have the time. How many Vista haters around here actually had viruses/trojans/whatever on Vista? Didn't have any malware, but then again because of all the software to stop the malware my PC ran slower than my AMD550 running window 98 How can I manage my system so I don't have an AV, just the Windows Firewall, and all works great, without problems, viruses, and so on. You can't. Why do think they have this stuff to begin with? Even MS knos they have problems when they release their own Malicious Software Remover. [start shameless promotion] Buy a Mac and get an xbox/playstation for games [/shameless]
I have been using vista since the day it has been out. It isn't that bad. Sure it was iffy at first but has time went on it got better and better. I love vista, now i ain't going to say it is better than xp because frankly it isn't. It takes time for os's to evolve. Xp sucked at first to. Vista will be great here in a couple of years.
its the fact that some games give you lower framerates thats making me shy away from Vista, thats rediculous imo
Vista's skin was so UGLY it just made me wanna puke,I found XP's skin nicer and if you don't like it you can get a skin software like winblinds but on vista even if you got winblinds nobody wanted to make a skin for vista. As for the perfomance the only good thing was DX10 on bioshock that was it DX10 HAS NO DIFFERENCE COMPARED TO DX9 IN MOST FORMS AND IN FACT RUNS SLOW. Vista explorer is so bugged it crashes like every 20 minutes specs 4gigs AMD 4400+ 8800GTS
I gave Vista a chance finally. I have been on it for 3 months now, I figured I would be back to XP within days. I was wrong. Once I got all of my drivers installed correctly and all of my softwar econfigured, I did have to mess with Vista settings and bump up my ram, but now I forgot sometimes that I am even on Vista. The only issue I have had is Internet Explorer. But This is a problem I have noted on every AMD 64 machine I have owned. Sometimes it just wont open, but hangs in the bg. But, I switched to Firefox and my woes are gone. I guess I ahve to say that I was wrong. Vista has great graphics, security, and it has been very stable for me. Though, I do wish I could play Halo 1 on Vista. Good bye XP SP2, I truly loved you.
amnesia623 my last question, was in fact, a conclusion. I don't have any problems with it, and neither have viruses and so on. And I really use it at full capacity. Most problems with any OS are generated by the users, not the system. If you know how to use an OS, there are very very few chances that it will crash. There are no perfect operating systems, but there are a lot of "crashy" users.
LOL, that is the funniest thing I have ever heard. Just the fact that Microsoft issues patches tells you that Vista is the problem not the user. Nice try blaming the user.
You need to read the thread again I was answering his remark about the user being the problem when it's Vista the problem. First of all being bloated ware. Since when does an OS require a Gig of memory? It's an operating system. Middle man between hardware and software. If you can grasp this then you will understand why nobody wants to upgrade. By the way the Mac commercial showing Vista bloated is PRICELESS.
I am not a vista hater , but i am running windows xp and have no intrest in vista , xp works great for me and i don't want to 'repair something that ain't broken'
Actually your statement did not make sense. Many people use Vista with no issues. Some have even mentioned this on this thread and on others in DP. It does stand to reason that based on this, one can say that perhaps it is not the OS at fault but the user. Ask any helpdesk person and they will tell you how many times the user is at fault rather than the OS (doesn't matter which OS). Your statement regarding the 1G memory also shows that you are not technical enough to make statements regarding Vista. No offense, but your are making statements that a non-techie would do, as you are obviously not aware of how Vista works memory-wise. Vista using a good chunk of you memory when you doing nothing? That's good. Vista is caching things. Vista works on the principal that empty memory is wasted memory (makes sense if you think about it). Vista itself sits inside a 512Meg footprint actually, the rest is cache and preload. People just look at the memory usage in Vista and say "OMG Vista is a memory hog!". They don't realise that this is a good thing! You can learn more about this by searching about Superfetch. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Why-Does-Windows-Vista-Consume-All-My-RAM-49975.shtml
This is incorrect that empty memory is wasted memory. Where are your applications suppose to reside when you launch them if memory is being used? This I hope was a misunderstanding in your part and not how Vista really works.
Vista does not take all the memory. SuperFetch analyzes your behavior and proactively puts applications into available main memory, so they can be launched quicker. There is memory left over and memory that is discarded as part of normal process should you access something on your drive that is not in memory. If you combine SuperFetch with ReadyBoost, where you can cache data on a USB flash drive, you increase your performance even more. Remember that anything in memory is way faster than accessing from the disk. Here is a good overview of Superfetch and ReadyBoost - http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/software...-readyboost-how-does-it-affect-you-234109.php With the price of memory nowadays, having at least 2GB RAM is extremely feasible. Also note that many who complain of slow performance can make use of Superfetch and ReadyBoost (hopefully they do have at least 2GB of RAM - apparantly the sweet spot according to the above article) to increase performance. Other ways to help get better speed is to turn of file indexing and Aero if the system specs are not that high. The only thing of note I can think of would be how Game performance may be impacted by SuperFetch, if any. I have yet to test this aspect to its limit on my system.
I agree somehow, but we are not in '70s. An operating system is not just an operating system anymore. Modern operating systems are the layer between HW and SW, but comes with a lot of utilities. An example here can be Linux, who can have even 2 DVDs with utilities. Do you want just an empty OS? You're free to go back to Windows 3.11, MS-DOS, FreeDOS and so on. But what works on those anymore?
The layer between hardware and software is firmware.... I don't care what time period we are in, an OS should still be an OS. It should allow me operate my system, not take control of it. All of that retarded addons should not come by default. There needs to be a minimal install CD/DVD. As it stands now, Vista is as obese as most of Americans. I'm not sure how your Linux example plays into this.
Considering the amount of non OS stuff Macs and Linux as well put in their default installations, I guess your ideology now quite defunct. In the future when voice/thought activated all-you-can-do OS's are out there, it is quaint to think of hardcore users like you still tapping away at their keyboard. Still does not stop you from using DOS or stripped down versions of Linux. You may also consider the Windows 2008 command only OS.
Just to clarify, Linux doesn't put much in their installation. It's very basic, it's certain distributions that but a lot into their installations. My distro on installs what I want. I can talk about recent Macs, as the last version I've used was 10.3.