Vista NOT so "Capable" after all...

[MRD]

Most of my gamer friends are sticking with XP not because of the slightly better framerates but because of compatibility. Everything runs in XP, and many games simply do not run at all in Vista. Newer ones do, and more and more older ones have gotten patched to run in Vista, but when it came out it was a gamer's nightmare, and even now it has some issues remaining.

 

[Mr.Guvernment]

i am one who doesn think vista is slow, as many say if you have a computer made with in the last 2 years you can run vista, albeit you may need to up to 2G of ram.

vista was bad due to crappy drivers (nvidia, thanks alot!)

 

[MRD]

Not necessarily, you can find new computers now that are single cpu, 1.6 ghz, 512mb ram, integrated graphics, etc... That won't run Vista, at least not decently well.

On a high end computer, the speed issues aren't really a big problem. Also, the improvements in hardware over the last few years have helped a lot to relieve the speed issues with Vista (and Vista has also helped to push hardware forward faster).

The fact that Windows 7 runs so much better on lower/older/slower hardware without loss of capability does show that Vista had some poor programming. The tendency nowadays is to just overwhelm any speed issues with faster and faster hardware when a bit of effort to produce superior code would work better.

I don't know how you can claim that you need 2G of RAM to run Vista and yet claim that computers made when Vista was released around 2 yrs ago all would have run it well. It's simply not true. Just because Vista runs well on high end and medium-high end computers doesn't mean it's not slow. It's definitely slow compared to XP and 2K. The speed issues are just covered up by powerful hardware for those lucky enough to have it.

 

[Captain Newbie]

i am one who doesn think vista is slow, as many say if you have a computer made with in the last 2 years you can run vista, albeit you may need to up to 2G of ram.

vista was bad due to crappy drivers (nvidia, thanks alot!)

TBH, most of the shortcomings of the Windows platform are the fault of the independent software vendors - in terms of drivers, annoyware installed on OEM PCs, and applications in general.

The good news is there's a world of software and devices for Microsoft Windows.

The BAD news is that there's a world of software and devices for Microsoft Windows - and most of it sucks.

I do find Vista slower on equivalent hardware, but I have new hardware and so don't care as much as I would if I had my computer of 2004-2005. In day to day use I find Vista superior to XP - just my own opinion. I am also a fairly late adopter of it--I waited for the first Service Pack, which made it perform MUCH more satisfactorially than the original release.

 

[Archer0915]

You do not have permission to perform this action. Please refresh the page and login before trying again.

Anybody ever get this message????

I got it twice maybe somebody is trying to tell me something and I didnt even have any bad words in the post????

EDIT: got booted 3 times

 

[Archer0915]

Ok I think I will reword
Points:
1. PPL are led by emotion and irrational thought to purchase something they do not need, furthermore they don't really want to know anything about what they are buying.
2. A great # of PPL do not even know what the specs. of the system they own are and this being the case they assume that because it is less than a year old it should be able to run anything out there. This means they are not qualified to make an informed decision about a software purchase.
3. People are generally not concerned with any details and sales persons in general have little more knowledge than the person asking the questions.
4. OEM's like PPL that are ignorant (not stupid) because it allows them to sell crap.
5. PPL tend to believe what they want to believe and they can not be persuaded (Fred says HP is top of the line and a $500 HP is better than a $700 Gateway).
6. If I tell one of these PPL that the cheap piece of crap computer they just bought last year should run the top of the line OS instead of the entry level version and that they should sue what do you think this guy is going to do??????

Hell I never have these kinds of problems do any of you????

 

[MRD]

Yes, people are morons. Yes, they do not want to learn about what they are buying. Yes, they buy the cheapest thing they can and are irritated when it doesn't function as well as the top of the line version their friend has. Yes, people are suckers for marketing and word of mouth advertising.

That isn't the point here though. The point is that these same consumers count on written information on product boxes to tell them the truth. If you bought a computer, and it said it had a GeForce 9800, and you got it home and it had on board SiS video, you'd have every right to complain. If they do this to everyone, as part of a plan to unload all the computers they made this way, then you have grounds for a class action lawsuit, and it's not frivolous, it's about very real damages and making companies acconutable for what they say/do.

That's pretty much what happened here. The computers were not Vista capable. "Capable" doesn't just mean they can run the OS. If that's what they wanted to say, then they could have said it differently, or provided more detail. They didn't. You could get info on it on MS's website, but you weren't referred there by the sticker, and you had no way of knowing you should go there. Also, there were two levels (forget the names), but the lower level didn't make it clear that it was the lower level and only ran a stripped down version of Vista and not well. "Vista capable" means capable of running any version of Vista. If it can only run Home Basic, it should say "Vista Home Basic Capable," preferably with a specific disclaimer that it cannot run Aero, Vista Home Premium, Vista Ultimate, or whatever else it cannot run.

Webster's gives the definition of "capable" as follows:

Possessing adequate power; qualified; able; fully competent

FULLY competent. Just running Vista Basic stripped down w/o Aero is NOT fully competent. The language chosen was deliberately misleading and designed to unload underpowered hardware on unsuspecting consumers that don't know better. Sure it's great to ask consumers to learn about everything, but how would you feel if your doctor were prescribing medication to you that didn't work very well because a company was giving him money to unload it since they had excess stock, even if he gave you a better price? Wouldn't you be angry? If he disclosed to you that it was an inferior product and not fully able to treat your condition, but that you'd save some money, and gave you the choice, then that would be up to you.

 

[Archer0915]

Good News:

Ok I think an experiment is about to happen. I had 2 box's come in for upgrade today both are Intel and hopefully they are min spec I don't feel like looking right now I know 1 is 1100 celery hopefully one has 915 vid. I will install vista and see what happens I have no copy of home basic but HP should install without aero. And I think this is all that MS will have to do to prove their case.

If I am not mistaken there were two stickers Vista Capable and Vista Compatible I will do some checking and let you know what I find however reading your last post made me think of another thing, how moch of this can be blamed on sales PPL and the other thing is I did not here you blame MS that is good.

EDIT: I was just thinking of one thing???? What in the hell are these PPL using for a benchmark to be sure they did not have another vista system siting around the house? I guess the went to Joe's and saw his SLI rig running Vista. And I still disagree I saw plenty of disclaimers about Vista capable and they said HB may not be capable of HP as to Capable and Compatible I could not find what I was looking for

 

[MRD]

I do blame MS. They approved those stickers. They aren't the only ones to blame though... Intel is probably most to blame of all (it seems like they were really the impetus behind selling underpowered graphics that they had stockpiled). OEM's are to blame too. Stores less so... I doubt the salespeople knew... I've met them, and they are usually morons, because those stores pay so little.

I do not think being able to run Vista w/o Aero will pass the test. I think it has to run Aero to be "Vista Capable" as I would consider Aero one of the signature components of Vista. If it said "Capable of running Vista without Aero," then that would be different. "Vista capable" means it can run any form of Vista decently well (not necessarily lightning fast, but at a usable speed that is not annoying to the user).

I think MS, Intel, and the OEM's will lose this case badly... but, it depends on what judge you get. After all, MS has been flagrantly violating antitrust laws for years and is still getting away with it (actually, Intel has too).

 

[Archer0915]

After all, MS has been flagrantly violating antitrust laws for years and is still getting away with it (actually, Intel has too).

Now I do agree with that but as I said there was a disclaimer. Yes MS let the sticker go on the box and I did read in little the disclaimer so if the morons in the class get anything and their lawyers get rich then that is because we have a screwed up legal system. I have a problem with paying ppl for being stupid??? But what else should you expect from a govt that makes READ:FORCES institutions of higher learning to lower standards so that they can tell PPL that they are educating the underprivileged.

EDIT: That did not come out right I should have said make colleges feel as if they must give passing grades to some students or lose federal money.

just thought I would post a link to sys specs for Vista and you cant run all the pretties in games on min spec systems dose this mean they get sued too??????

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista/get/system-requirements.aspx

 

[MRD]

Games aren't Vista. Games are applications that run under Vista. Aero is part of Vista. Big difference.

There probably is no system out there that will run EVERY application written for a given OS. Each app has its own requirements. If software is PART OF THE OS, then for hardware to be OS-capable, it has to run that software.

If people were complaining about not being able to run Crysis (on high settings, or even at all) on their new craptop that had a Vista-capable label, I'd be laughing at them. They are complaining about be unable to run Aero or other basic Vista components, which makes their case legit.

 

[Archer0915]

Correct to a point Vista for lack of a more modern term is an OS however Aero is not an OS Aero is an application meant to enhance the users experience. Geoworks was a shell Windows NON NT up to XP were shell applications. Vista as a whole is not qualified to be considered an OS only parts of vista are the OS the rest is what you call value added software. A 32 bit X86 OS will run on any processor of that class it is all of the other crap that will not run lets get down to fundamentals an OS need only allow HW to function I will clarify if I need to.

It is the applications included with VISTA that have the problems not the OS. FTR I hate GUI's they are a waste allowing everybody to gain access to crap they have no business messing with.

 

[jayfella]

Yes, people are morons.

hehe. Nice wording. +1!

 

[MRD]

Correct to a point Vista for lack of a more modern term is an OS however Aero is not an OS Aero is an application meant to enhance the users experience.

It's debatable whether it's part of the OS itself, depending on your definition of OS, but that isn't really the point. It's definitely part of Vista (and was sold as one of the key defining features thereof), so Vista capable implies Aero capable. GNU and Linux people often argue over the definition of an OS. Linux itself, for example, is just a kernel. It cannot even start a computer on its own. You need a lot of things from GNU (like, for example, glibc, the GNU C Library, or some kind of boot loader, like GRUB) to make an operating system, and this is the point of distributions. Windows doesn't function on this model though. MS has always been much more one-size-fits-all as opposed to the infinite customizability of GNU/Linux distributions.

I would call Vista an OS in its entirety as it is sold as such, defined by MS as such, and defined by pretty much everyone else in the world as such. Given that that is the common understanding of the term Vista, and that you cannot expect people to understand what a kernel is, society/industry/IT has pretty much decided that all the versions of Windows since 95 are operating systems, and that that includes things like their interfaces.

A 32 bit X86 OS will run on any processor of that class it is all of the other crap that will not run lets get down to fundamentals an OS need only allow HW to function I will clarify if I need to.

This is completely false. Each cpu has different instruction sets available. With Intel, they are generally supersets of earlier processors with a few exceptions. Even the kernel itself will not run on all x86 cpus if it is compiled for a 586 or 686 as lower x86 cpu's lack those instructions and will bluescreen. Arch Linux makes a point of not being generically x86 but rather i686 and above. My Gentoo install won't run on a Core 2 Quad, as it uses instructions unique to the phenom (part of Gentoo is customizing the builds of your own software). My 32 bit Gentoo installs are for Athlon XP and will not run on P4's as the P4's lack 3DNow!

It is the applications included with VISTA that have the problems not the OS. FTR I hate GUI's they are a waste allowing everybody to gain access to crap they have no business messing with.

I don't hate GUI's, but I do make very frequent use of the CLI and find Windows lack of support for that very frustrating. I can't stand GUI based file management, although it has its uses for the clueless.

I think your attempt to distinguish Vista from "apps included with Vista" is spurious at best... If you were talking about add on downloads that are entirely optional and not marketed as defining features of Windows, then maybe, but Aero is, to the general public, THE defining feature of Vista. That need not be true for a GUI (X.org certainly isn't as much a part of the OS... you can run Linux without any GUI), but Windows doesn't function w/o a GUI, and Aero is the default Vista interface.

 

[Archer0915]

Actually you said it and you defined classes yes there are differences in but access to lower levels of the hardware are still handled by an OS an OS of today is not what I call an OS The os primary function is to allow programs to easily access low level HW not draw a pretty picture or provide a calculator. There has been much improvement in the os structure but be careful what you call an os because GUI is just value added and not necessary (it is easier and faster though).

UHHHH but a gui is fundamental for the newer os's but dammit I will go back to the game thing do we sue because no bells and whistles??? hell no and that is what you are advocating here and there is no way around it a gui is necessary to use vista. Aero Glass is value added and not necessary that is a fact you dont need to run it to use the os Home Basic is all you must have no Aero glass.

Been doing my homework and the fact is that vista specs just call for 32bit at 800Mhz no mmx, sse, 3d now or other the OS in no longer as os it is a software package As to linux, it is written with diffrent distros to take advantage of CPU features. You are not incorrect as to the necessity of higher end procs for some distros moreover Linux is not windows and is actually a OS with a GUI, Windows is a program (bunch of programs) with the OS at its core it is in no way comprable to linux.

these are the specs of the last real MS os as well as its GUI:
Processor 8086, 80386 or better for advanced memory management
RAM 512 KB
Drive space 5 MB
Drives Runs from hard disk or diskette
Video Monochrome, CGA, EGA, VGA or better
File systems FAT
Compatibility DOS programs
DOS device drivers
Interface Text based OS. With the addition of Windows 3.x, the user gets a GUI like OS.
Installation DOS must be installed on a primary partition on the first drive.
Variants Full
Upgrade from prior versions of MS/PC-DOS
OEM
Versions V1.0 1981 First release
V1.25 Jun-1982 Bug fixes, double sided floppy support
V2.0 Mar-1983 Hard disk support, print spooling, installable device drivers
V2.01 1983 International support
V2.11 1983 Bug fixes
V3.0 Aug-1984 Larger hard disk support, file locking, extended error reporting
V3.1 Nov-1994 Network print and file sharing, supports Windows 1.0
V3.2 1986 Support for 3.5" diskettes
V3.3 1987 Improved multi-language support
V3.31 1987 Bug fixes
V4.0 1988 Visual shell, support for logical partitions larger than 32 MB
V5.0 9-Apr-1991 Bug fixes
V6.00 10-Mar-1993 Bundled various utilities, disk compression
V6.20 30-Sep-1993 Improved disk compression
V6.21 1994 - Removed disk compression (patent issue)
V6.22 31-May-1994 - New disk compression added

These are the Specs for ms dos 6.22:
Summary This was the first successful OS for the IBM PC platform, and was chosen by IBM for its PCs. Each major version added considerable improvements, but today is quite dated. Typical usage is with a command line interface, but a number of shells were produced that allows avoidance of the command line. Microsoft licensed MS-DOS to IBM, which produced their minor variant PC-DOS. DOS still lives on, as most functions are supported under Windows and Linux. News MS-DOS is no longer sold or supported by Microsoft, but the commands can be run from a "DOS box" of Windows.
All sales in all channels were discontinued in November 31, 2001.
Requirements
Product MS-DOS 6.22 Processor 8086, 80386 or better for advanced memory management RAM 512 KB Drive space 5 MB Drives Runs from hard disk or diskette Video Monochrome, CGA, EGA, VGA or better File systems FAT Compatibility DOS programs
DOS device drivers Interface Text based OS. With the addition of Windows 3.x, the user gets a GUI like OS. Installation DOS must be installed on a primary partition on the first drive. Variants Full
Upgrade from prior versions of MS/PC-DOS
OEM Versions V1.0 1981 First release
V1.25 Jun-1982 Bug fixes, double sided floppy support
V2.0 Mar-1983 Hard disk support, print spooling, installable device drivers
V2.01 1983 International support
V2.11 1983 Bug fixes
V3.0 Aug-1984 Larger hard disk support, file locking, extended error reporting
V3.1 Nov-1994 Network print and file sharing, supports Windows 1.0
V3.2 1986 Support for 3.5" diskettes
V3.3 1987 Improved multi-language support
V3.31 1987 Bug fixes
V4.0 1988 Visual shell, support for logical partitions larger than 32 MB
V5.0 9-Apr-1991 Bug fixes
V6.00 10-Mar-1993 Bundled various utilities, disk compression
V6.20 30-Sep-1993 Improved disk compression
V6.21 1994 - Removed disk compression (patent issue)
V6.22 31-May-1994 - New disk compression added

Specs for Windows 3.11
Windows 3.1
(enhanced mode)
REQUIREMENTS

Computer:
100% IBM Compatible
Processor:
80386 or higher processor
Memory:
2MB + RAM
Drives:
8MB Hard disk drive space
3.5" / 5.25"Floppy
Sound:

Video:
VGA
Controls:
keyboard / Mouse
operating system:
DOS 3.1 and Higher

Windows for workgroups 3.11
REQUIREMENTS
Released  1994

Computer:
100% IBM Compatible
Processor:
386 or higher processor
Memory:
3MB + RAM
Drives:
14MB Hard disk drive space
3.5" / 5.25"Floppy
Sound:

Video:
VGA
Controls:
keyboard / Mouse
operating system:
DOS 3.3 and Higher

The point I was making is Bios does a hand off to the OS and the OS allows higher level prog language to communicate with hardware through drivers for specific hardware. An os is a jump off point for other programs therefore Aero is a seperate prog included in Vista it does not degrade from the overall functionality of the OS by not having it, it only pretties it up, moreover if it impeded the OS from preforming its primary function (running other 3rd party software) then I would agree with you 100%.

reading the Version changes gives the idea of what I am talking about as far as what an os must do it is all about hardware here are some links to read up on that tell you about what the function of the os is. Being pretty aint one of them however granting full functionality of all installed hardware is.

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/o/operating_system.html
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/operating-system.htm
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-operating-system.htm

 

[Trombe]

The os primary function is to allow programs to easily access low level HW not draw a pretty picture or provide a calculator. There has been much improvement in the os structure but be careful what you call an os because GUI is just value added and not necessary (it is easier and faster though).

No. In Linux world, I can uninstall gnome and have nothing but a CLI if I wanted to. In M$ world, it is impossible to not have their built in GUI. In fact, I dare you to try to uninstall Windows Mail right now. Oh what's that? You can't? It's a part of the Vista Operating system.

And seriously, learn how to punctuate before claiming you do your homework.

 

[Archer0915]

UHHHH but a gui is fundamental for the newer os's but dammit I will go back to the game thing do we sue because no bells and whistles??? hell no and that is what you are advocating here and there is no way around it a gui is necessary to use vista. Aero Glass is value added and not necessary that is a fact you dont need to run it to use the os Home Basic is all you must have no Aero glass.

UHHHHH? I said that read ^ and I will work on the punctuation but please read the full post before calling me stupid.

Aero glass is the name of the pretties.

EDIT: actually just AERO ok I am stupid

 

[Archer0915]

As to linux, it is written with diffrent distros to take advantage of CPU features. You are not incorrect as to the necessity of higher end procs for some distros moreover Linux is not windows and is actually a OS with a GUI, Windows is a program (bunch of programs) with the OS at its core it is in no way comprable to linux.

I did not say you had to use GUI as you can operate command line only.
OHHH you must have missed that too.

Okay perhaps that is not clear let me put it this way, it is an independent OS that you may also use a GUI with.

For the record AERO is not a program it is a theme that requires more resources than average themes to function adequately therefore it qualifies IMO as a program though it really is not.

 

[MRD]

Aero is a defining feature of Vista. While we disagree on what is part of the OS itself, it is not relevant. The stickers didn't say "Capable of running the OS that comes with Vista". They said Windows Vista capable. Thus, they should be able to run the software that comes in the box with big letters on it that say "Windows Vista". Aero was marketed more heavily than any other aspect of Vista, and it was sold as being part of Vista, so if MS makes claims of Vista capable, that hardware better be able to run Aero.

Note that this is what MS believe too, and the documents now coming out clearly show that they changed this due to a special request from Intel, not because they believed it to be more correct. Even they believed what they were doing was deceitful. It was one of those things that happened behind closed doors without the interest of the consumer taken into account.

Vista will not run on a 386. For the same reason that Arch Linux won't, it is compiled assuming the existence of instructions in the i686 processors (for the 32 bit version). It's not a question of power or speed... it's a matter of incompatibility.

 

[Archer0915]

I am glad it is you this time MRD I almost lost my composure earlier. We are both wrong and correct as I believe you are speaking as Vista as a whole and I am only looking at the operating system component. I have already explained the OS and I am sure you already knew as you appear to be a knowledgeable individual. I am only basing my argument on the HW interfacing capabilities of Vista as I am an old DOS jockey perhaps I may be a little older and wiser (hard headed that is) we both have a legitimate point and I guess it will stay that way. I just don't see an issue with MS and you do my issue is with OEM's. As to the linux thing

Linux will run on a 386SX-16. It doesn't mean that that machine is "Linux capable". You probably can't run a GUI or almost any apps at all.

Vista capable impleis the ability to run Vista decently well... not all the bells and whistles, but 25 minutes to load notepad, even if it technically works, doesn't count.

are these not your words???

Had to pull that one. I know what you mean as I said I plan on a low end build to see if it is operable and I do feel that other than the Aero issue the relative slowness of these low end systems is due in large part to OEM bloatware and not streamlining the os for the hardware which is the responsibility of the OEM.