Vista Sucks! Microsoft can't even give it away

This is your opinion and your entitled to it. The fact remains that most programs are big because of eye candy and not on what they can do.

 

It's not an opinion...its a fact. Sure many programs are large due to eye candy, but there is a large demand for spiffy looking programs. Not everyone wants basic gray backgrounds with black text in their software. However, there are tons of programs such as 3D Studio Max that are large resource programs without any "eye candy" at all. It is simply a massive program used to create 3D models. Programs will get heavier whether you want to admit/realize it or not. The industry is in the process of creating crazy new technology with PC games and programs and I can assure you they won't be light in resources.

 

For years, Microsoft has made bigger versions of its core products, in the belief that customers want more and more features. That thinking may have undergone a reversal, with the recent revelation that Redmond is working on a stripped-down version of the Windows kernel that would dramatically reduce its footprint.

Microsoft Distinguished Engineer Eric Traut, who works on virtualization projects, said during a presentation at the University of Illinois last week that Microsoft is developing "MinWin," a very small kernel that will eventually be part of all Windows operating systems.


http://www.adtmag.com/article.aspx?id=21477

 

Not sure what that has to do with the discussion, but it is an interesting article. Thanks for sharing

 

My vista machine is faster, better looking, smoother running and more compatible than my xp machine. I used xp the other day and i felt like i was back on windows 95. For all you vista haters, I'm not one of them. I think it's the best yet, and have been running it without any hick ups.

 

you probably have a slow machine with xp

I bet if your new computer was running XP it would be even better still

 

xp whn it was out...many didnt like it....

 

Same thing was true with 95 and 98. But after time, they became very well used. The only release I think everyone was fond of from the start was Windows 2000.

 

lol I think Vista just wastes allot of memory on graphics! I rather have a fast and reliable operating system rather then a good looking operating system. I'm afraid I cant say the same about women!

 

You prolly don't game or multi task. Benchmarks never lie.

 

Does the hardware match between them? No, it probably doesn't. Drop XP on that machine running vista and enjoy the 10-20% speed boost...

But then, I can make both Vista and XP 'seem' faster just by turning off all that goof assed ****ing eye candy bullshit. When I click on something I want it NOW, not five seconds from now after watching some goof assed animation run. "Oooh, arent' the transparancy, slide and fade effects cool" - NO, THEY'RE NOT ***ING COOL. Transparancy makes the text on the object that's actually focused a pain in the ass to read and the animations waste time that could be better spent by my continuing my work instead of sitting there waiting for that rubbish to finish.

Of course, it could be worse - it could be that compiz or expose manure.

 

angry much? you can easily adjust the transparency setting, but I have no idea about the animations you speak of? Vista owns XP so just get used to it

 

I like the way Vista looks and I use this OS everytime I has nothing better to do, like watching youTube or the like.

I hate the waiting time before the systema actually start so the older the OS the quicker it is with such impressive amount of memory required by Vista.

Of course older versions (95/98/ME) don't take full advantage of bigger memory blocks but any OS is faster than Vista in most aspects.

However Vista is so sweet candy-eye like no other, and the slower at startup or shutdown.

·​

 

There's no way how any OS can need so much hardware resources as Vista does and not be bloated. Common, 2gigs of RAM just to have OS running fast? I have recently installed Ubuntu linux on 256mb RAM machine and it was insanely fast.

Windows Vista looks beautiful?? Well, well, yes it is much nicer than XP, I agree. But look at OS X or any recent linux distribution with compiz or beryl. Much much nicer than Vista, more eye candy effects, and still it runs fast on 256mb RAM. Another thing about linux distros. They do everything Vista can do, and do it faster and in more secure way.

By the way, can anybody list advantages of Vista over XP any other than nicer look? I doubt so, because that's the only thing Vista is better at.

 

I could list advantages but whats the point. People who hate Vista have their minds made up. It won't change for a few years regardless of what any happy and legitimate Vista user says.

 

the thing is that some companies just dont think upgrading to vista will benefit them because this is not only 100-200$ vista, its also upgrade to a new hardware ;p because old pc's wont handle vista

 

ha ha.. use the power of opensource.. Linux Rocks!!!

 

The trouble I have with Vista is that it does not support about 30% of my software programs! I have had to purchase XP, which I will now have to pay for someone to install it in a dual bootable configuration, just so I can run my programs. That is why, in my opinion, Vista DOES suck - big time.

 

My mind isn't made up. I have been using Vista for couple of months on very powerful pc and it was still slow as slug. As soon as I started doing my usual work (= photoshop + flash + fireworks graphics, testing php/mysql scripts on local server and I have had opened few other applications like I was used to in XP... that's psi, trillian, firewall + antivirus, torrent client, download accelerator, mediamonkey and opera) Vista started to behave slow as slug. I had it installed on 2gigs of RAM, core2duo pc, and it wasn't enough.

The same work I am now doing in XP and even so many applications haven't slowed down the OS and I have still couple hundred mbs of RAM free for more demanding tasks I sometimes do like encoding some videos etc.

I am talking from my own experience, not because I hate Vista. When Vista was firstly announced, I was really looking forward to using it because it was said to be based on Server 2003 source. So I thought it will be great OS. And it turned to be not finished betaversion of OS. I still cannot understand how an OS based on Server 2003 source (which is btw the fastest running Windows alternative and it's still being used in many companies/corporations) could turn to this slug called Vista.

I am looking forward to SP1... that might persuade me to give Vista another chance but in current state it isn't OS I could use for my usual work without getting pissed of because even single tasks like opening My computer takes 10 seconds and everything is in slowmotion.

 

Vista is just a baby...you have to give it time to grow. XP didn't start out with the status it is at now. However, I don't understand your problems. I run Vista with lower specs than you, do the same things, but experience no issues? I just don't understand...