Vista - Time to sort it out... [Rant]

[Prot]

I think when you install Vista, or any operating system for that matter, it should work the way Windows 98 did. As you go along, you choose what features and components to install and which ones to leave off, or if you want to you could press a button that says "Minimum Install," "Typical Install," or "Full Install."

Regarding the use of memory or hard drive space, memory is cheap these days and it is common for a $500 computer to have 1 or sometimes even 2 gigs of ram. The same thing could be said for hard drive space. Earlier operating systems were designed in an era when hard drive space was measured in kilobytes. Remember when Windows operating systems did not have a year or a name attached to them? Instead it was version numbers like 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 3.1. For those of you a little older, you can remember when we didn't even have a hard drive. You turned the computer on and that was it. Instantly on! No hard drive! If you needed storage, you would use a cassette player or if you were high tech you might have had a 5 1/4 floppy drive. As hardware advancements are made, the operating system is made to take advantage of those improvements. Nobody is forcing anybody to buy or use Vista or any other operating system.

I fully agree with the original poster that there are a lot of lunatics running around saying Vista will bring about the end of the world when they have never even tried it or given it a chance and have only glanced a few screenshots on websites that speculate on conspiracy theory.

Personally, I'm not switching to Vista yet. As for as driver problems are concerned or other program compatability problems, hardware and software manufacturers knew Vista was coming and have known for a number of years. It is they who have failed to write and test drivers. Upset because you have to throw out legacy hardware? Then simply do not switch to Vista if your hardware is too old to run it. But, but, but I shouldn't have to do that. What is Microsoft supposed to do? Make Vista compatabile with the UNIVAC or ENIAC? Don't know what those are? Pick up a book and read about the evolution of computers.

Hey Vista is too expensive! Then don't buy it if you can't afford it. If enough people don't buy it, then perhaps the price may come down. It reminds me of some the mac addicts that somehow equate their value as a human being with the value or capability of their computers.

Someone suggested that the OS should not include a bunch of extras since this role can be filled by third party vendors who provide add ons. Vista doesn't lock these third party vendors out. What it does do is provide some basic functionality at really a reduced cost. If the OS would do nothing but turn the computer on, it would start getting real expensive real quick to buy (rather than pirate) the add ons that are necessary to have more functionality. I like the fact that XP can burn cd's without me having to buy Roxio or Nero or some other product. That's one example of the OS providing a basic functionality that would otherwise require spending money on a separate program. If I want more control and capability to burn cd's, then I can still buy a product from Roxio or Nero. Have fun with your computer and if it helps you to work, then do that too. It's a computer. It's not a replacement for a vital organ such as an artificial heart. Damn, my heart crashed when I was booting it up LOL

 

[hitbyaprkedcar7]

Completely agree.

The one thing i have a complaint about, is software support. Well, the lack of. A lot of the install space, you have to remember, is thousands of drivers from the most popular companies and hardware, so its plug and play and no install 304930943094309 drivers after you instal the hardware. My lexmark printer worked right after install, even though when i go to lexmark's website, it says its not Vista compatible yet. That makes me happy.

The main thing that peeves me, is Pinnacle Studio not working, as i really really need this App. There deadline is March, 07 though.

 

[deathman20]

The main thing that peeves me, is Pinnacle Studio not working, as i really really need this App. There deadline is March, 07 though.

Well at least there is a deadline for it. Heck some software support is all the way out til mid summer if not later as well.

 

[shadin]

Someone suggested that the OS should not include a bunch of extras since this role can be filled by third party vendors who provide add ons. Vista doesn't lock these third party vendors out. What it does do is provide some basic functionality at really a reduced cost. If the OS would do nothing but turn the computer on, it would start getting real expensive real quick to buy (rather than pirate) the add ons that are necessary to have more functionality. I like the fact that XP can burn cd's without me having to buy Roxio or Nero or some other product. That's one example of the OS providing a basic functionality that would otherwise require spending money on a separate program. If I want more control and capability to burn cd's, then I can still buy a product from Roxio or Nero. Have fun with your computer and if it helps you to work, then do that too. It's a computer. It's not a replacement for a vital organ such as an artificial heart. Damn, my heart crashed when I was booting it up LOL

That was me. I think the extras should be optional, as someone else just mentioned. I'll never use Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, Remote Desktop, Windows Media Center, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Meeting Space, Windows Defender, the sidebar gadget, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Mail, or the new fancy included games. So ideally I'd like an option to cut all that bloat out of there. I'm very picky about the quality of the applications I use, and generally Microsoft just doesn't cut it, unless we're talking about Visual C++.

I still hold that I agree with the original poster about the DRM thing being all hype, however.

 

[brakezone]

I am getting sick of people assuming that Vista is slow, rubbish, unstable, limited and stops you doing anything other than browse.

Actually, while the synthetic performance in vista is basically the same as XP, real world benchmarks show that XP is quite a bit faster across the board. The one thing I like about vista is the smooth desktop and new effects.

What is Microsoft supposed to do? Make Vista compatabile with the UNIVAC or ENIAC? Don't know what those are? Pick up a book and read about the evolution of computers.

I want to overclock my UNIVAC with softfsb and vista doesn't support!

 

[Inceptor]

It's a computer. It's not a replacement for a vital organ such as an artificial heart. Damn, my heart crashed when I was booting it up LOL

Excluding, of course, Robocop.


My home premium comes tomorrow with my new gear. I always try not to read too much into anyone else's speculation about these things. I'm sure most doomsayers are people who, for whatever reason, just don't want to upgrade yet they see reasons they may have to in the unforseeable future.

"Sure you don't have to upgrade right now , but if you want to keep doing xxx you will eventually have to." I believe it's this kind of thinking that causes a feeling of helplessness in some people. An inability to avoid what they see, even if they aren't willing to admit it, as the inevitable.

It can get people's blood up to feel this way and make them fly off the cuff and say things that may not be true or that they feel may somehow change their fate. Personally I find this to be true every winter, late on tuesday night when my wife asks me to take the trash out. Helpless and angry and willing to say anything to get out of it.

I think in the end it won't really be all that signifigant. It is, like Prot said, just a computer. I don't really care what it's called as long as it's available and let's me enjoy my computer. As far as what everyone else thinks about Vista, well no offense to anyone else, but I'd like to experience it for myself, and not take someone else's word for it or be dissuaded by their reasoning when their situation may not be anything like mine. Just my two bits.

 

[DanFraser]

That was me. I think the extras should be optional, as someone else just mentioned. I'll never use Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, Remote Desktop, Windows Media Center, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Meeting Space, Windows Defender, the sidebar gadget, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Mail, or the new fancy included games. So ideally I'd like an option to cut all that bloat out of there. I'm very picky about the quality of the applications I use, and generally Microsoft just doesn't cut it, unless we're talking about Visual C++.

I still hold that I agree with the original poster about the DRM thing being all hype, however.

Just because it's installed de facto doesn't mean you have to use it. I don't use most of that stuff on Vista, partly because I have no need to. However, I have tried them, and it does make for some good software to use without paying out for Nero etc etc.

Some things in there are kind of necessary. Defender for example, damn is it good. I took my main drive out and checked it in another computer, and nothing came up. Nothing, seriously. In XP I always expected to find about 100 hits of spyware and other rubbish.

And dude, Solitaire totally rocks in Vista!

 

[Neuromancer]

Yah windows defender is good and has been good for a while. Only thing that MIGHT be better is spysweeper and thats not free.

Sidebar, I like the gadgets, although you cant just pop anyones in there, some people dont know how to code. The Storage gadget had me using 150 MB of memory for the sidbar. I am now doan to 13MB Running weather w/ forecast. ebay, the talking one and my dual core/mem monitor.

Im running 2 messengers, opera, PC probe Avast sidebar, daemon and a total of 50 processes, I have not endeavored to tweak it yet. No need, Im not benchmarking it. Runs smooth and awesome.

I have no complaints about the OS requiring more uptodate hardware, if it could do the exact saem thing with less resources, then sure thats an argument worth considering. As already pointed out you can add remove whatever you want. nLite I beleive supports vista and there is a subforum just for unatteneded Vista install over at MSFN.

But if all you are worried about is a slim trim OS... no its not for you. But personally i ADDED stuff to XP not removed stuff. Ok not tru I removed windows messenger and outlook express, but then installed MSN messenger and outlook.

I am very happy with the final product it is MUCH better then the Beta. Only complaint I have with the OS, is the first time I open Computer up, it scans the CD. Anything else is a non MS issue.

 

[brakezone]

solitair!!!! I got the business version and don't have

 

[Prot]

That was me. I think the extras should be optional, as someone else just mentioned. I'll never use Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, Remote Desktop, Windows Media Center, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Meeting Space, Windows Defender, the sidebar gadget, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Mail, or the new fancy included games. So ideally I'd like an option to cut all that bloat out of there.

That's why I think the following:

I think when you install Vista, or any operating system for that matter, it should work the way Windows 98 did. As you go along, you choose what features and components to install and which ones to leave off, or if you want to you could press a button that says "Minimum Install," "Typical Install," or "Full Install."

 

[Hipcrostino]

You don't show any drops because your current hardware is overkill for any game available on the market, and will be for some time (minus games that are purposely tech-demos, like Crysis). My point of contention is that there's no reason for an OS to be so resource hungry. The OS should be a thin layer used to run what I want to run, not the end-all of computing.

The OS shouldn't add a bunch of bloatware just because high-end tech has the resources. There's plenty of games and programs to fill that role.

To run DX9 vista uses an emulation layer on top of DX10, thats why there is a frame rate drop. 8800's run both dx9 and dx10 nativly, so that should help in that department, but the r600 is dx10 native only, so its likally that dx9 games will run worse on it than todays highend cards once again because of an emulation layer.

but yes i can see your argument. UAC ****s me to no end.