Author Topic: Anybody Using Vista? (Read 9665 times)

Skuzzy · « **Reply #210 on:** March 27, 2007, 02:28:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Puck
What are you talking about, Skuzzy? I LOVE Vista.

It just might be the end of the M$ monopoly.

ROFL! Good one Puck.

But I fear, if Windows ME could not unseat that monopoly, then nothing will.

Wes14 · « **Reply #211 on:** March 27, 2007, 02:38:22 PM »

hey does vista still use system32 files:confused:

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #212 on:** March 27, 2007, 02:40:54 PM »

Skuzzy, the REAL evil behind vista, is the fact that MS is gonna drop support for every other system ASAP.

I guess it's time to get a backup copy set up for XP now, eh?

Puck · « **Reply #213 on:** March 27, 2007, 03:01:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy

But I fear, if Windows ME could not unseat that monopoly, then nothing will.

The difference, my dear sir, is that Vista proves Windows 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, 98SE, NT, 2000, ME, and XP were not isolated incidents of utter crapware. Vista is the NEW windows, completely re-engineered to not only be crappy, but pop up dialogs explaining that you don't have the correct DRM key to suffer through the crappiness.

Even my CTO (who incidentally wrote the original VB Outlook long ago) has finally admitted Vista is a dog. Personally I think he is insulting dogs everywhere, but then I'm ever so slightly biased.

SH33P · « **Reply #214 on:** March 27, 2007, 03:17:15 PM »

Had it, got rid of it! nuff said.

Irwink! · « **Reply #215 on:** March 27, 2007, 03:24:26 PM »

Out of curiousity, I wonder how many of the asembled pitchfork wielding villagers here, besides Skuzzy, have actually used Vista for any period of time or even used it at all? Five minutes at a display machine in your local retailer doesn't count by the way.

Puck · « **Reply #216 on:** March 27, 2007, 03:50:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Irwink!
Out of curiousity, I wonder how many of the asembled pitchfork wielding villagers here, besides Skuzzy, have actually used Vista for any period of time or even used it at all? Five minutes at a display machine in your local retailer doesn't count by the way.

I am required by occupation to be intimately familiar with it. Have it on a virtual machine and a dual-core laptop. The more I use, the less I like. I work for a M$ Gold Certified partner, so we have an open license.

Don't like the new ribbons on Orifice 2007 either. Call me old fashioned. Visio 2007 is alright, though.

Triumph · « **Reply #217 on:** March 31, 2007, 04:02:11 PM »

Vista is still going strong....I still love it...No Issues...whatsoever Solid frame rate of 75 @ all times...no mystery discoz....

I'm not selling it...I'm just tellin it...

Skuzzy · « **Reply #218 on:** March 31, 2007, 04:23:53 PM »

Good on ya. Just because you like it does not mean there are not serious problems with the OS. There are serious problems with it. Ranging from broken drivers, to compatibility problems, to flaky general operation.

And if you spent any time at Microsoft's own TechNet site, you would be concerned. You just think you are not having problems.

People cannot make informed decisions if they only get the glossed over opinion of an end user. Do some research and it is quite apparent this OS is not ready for prime time.

Kev367th · « **Reply #219 on:** March 31, 2007, 05:08:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Irwink!
Out of curiousity, I wonder how many of the asembled pitchfork wielding villagers here, besides Skuzzy, have actually used Vista for any period of time or even used it at all? Five minutes at a display machine in your local retailer doesn't count by the way.

Well we have started getting it on our new laptops.

Complaints, comments from users are -
Where is this now?
Why is it so slow?

etc etc.

So much so I am now at the stage were as soon as they are ordered I now go out and get an OEM WinXP Pro ready for them. (with the bosses blessing, he hated his Vista 'slowtop' also).

Irwink! · « **Reply #220 on:** March 31, 2007, 08:18:54 PM »

Well that's a total of four people so far...

I now have it on a desktop and a laptop. On the desktop the only problem has been an occassional failure of IE to execute. That hasn't happened in over a week. On the laptop I haven't experienced a single hitch. Both machines are Core 2 Duo's so there's no problem with slow performance. I wonder what the hardware configuration was where users exclaimed how slow it was. I've also spent quite a bit of time on Technet too so I'm aware of the problems some people are having. But with the exception of the IE thing - no problems on this end.

I'm still very much reminded of a time five and a half years ago when the pitchfork wielders were up in arms over another new OS.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #221 on:** April 01, 2007, 07:59:00 AM »

It is slow. Very slow. My Core 2 Due system (ATI X1600XT) with Vista, runs the game slower than my home 1.8Ghz XP Pro system (ATI 8500).

It takes longer to boot (48 seconds) than either my old Windows 2000 system (32 seconds), or my home XP Pro system (16 seconds). It takes longer to do everything. It is not going to get faster. Vista has too many background processes/threads to be able to overcome that deficit. It is designed that way.

Unlike XP, which Microsoft did attempt to increase the performance of, Vista will not get significantly better. It would need to just to get back to where XP/2000 was in terms of performance.

Your problem seems to be one of a perspective where you had terrible XP systems. I find this true of every person who is making the claims you are making.

Again you cannot run more software, at the same time, and have it all run faster than running less software at the same time. If you have had poorly running XP systems, then it is your own fault. Why do people have a difficult time with that logic?

Maybe this analogy will help. Take a couple of Corvette's. On one, add armor plating, to protect the driver, add bulletproof glass, to protect the driver, add a full chromemoly roll cage to protect the driver, add heavy duty springs to hold the weight, reinforce the frame to support the weight, drop in a 4.56:1 axle ratio so it can move.
Now, take that Corvette (Vistat) and run it against the stock Corvette. That is essentially Vista versus XP. Vista cannto be faster. There is no way it can be faster. There is no way it will ever be faster. It will always be slower than a good installation of XP.

The problems at MS's TechNet site are real. I am having a ton of problems with Vista on my office system.

republic · « **Reply #222 on:** April 01, 2007, 08:30:11 AM »

Have any of you had the odd copy bug/feature where it takes 30+ seconds to copy even a 5kb text file? I've seen several sites mentioned it...seems like it happens to me quite often.

I gave Vista a good ol' college try...but I got tired of the oddities. Supreme Commander was nigh unplayable on my system...IL2 1946 had drastically reduced framerates. It may be years until nVidia/ATI can get driver performance back...course the newer and better GPU's will begin to mask the deficiencies of the OS by powering through them.

Vista had some neat ideas but most of them were cut or neutered. I've yet to find a single thing in Vista that performs better than XP, or a single thing I can do in Vista that I can't do in XP.

The updated UI is nice but...a far cry from OSX.

Honestly...I was hoping for Vista to be the OSX killer, so I could break my reliance on the egomaniac that is Steve Jobs.

What I don't understand....is why don't they just start from square 0? A new OS with what we know today. Virtualization Apps like Parallels can run XP at 75% efficiency, and gamers can always dual-boot for legacy game compatibility. Heck...build in dual boot from the getgo (OSX/OS9 Classic).

Think of what a company like Microsoft could do if they made their own Linux distro.... OSX killer indeed....

Irwink! · « **Reply #223 on:** April 01, 2007, 09:53:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
It is slow. Very slow. My Core 2 Due system (ATI X1600XT) with Vista, runs the game slower than my home 1.8Ghz XP Pro system (ATI 8500).

It takes longer to boot (48 seconds) than either my old Windows 2000 system (32 seconds), or my home XP Pro system (16 seconds). It takes longer to do everything. It is not going to get faster. Vista has too many background processes/threads to be able to overcome that deficit. It is designed that way.

Unlike XP, which Microsoft did attempt to increase the performance of, Vista will not get significantly better. It would need to just to get back to where XP/2000 was in terms of performance.

Your problem seems to be one of a perspective where you had terrible XP systems. I find this true of every person who is making the claims you are making.

Again you cannot run more software, at the same time, and have it all run faster than running less software at the same time. If you have had poorly running XP systems, then it is your own fault. Why do people have a difficult time with that logic?

Skuzzy, I never had a poorly performing XP system. I never made any claim in this thread or any other that Vista outperformed XP. Therefore I don't have the "problem" that you claim. The desktop system I mentioned is set up to dual boot. The XP side install is less than six months old and totally uncluttered. I am able to make direct comparisons between two fairly fresh installs. AHII does perform better under XP. I have stated such in this forum. Like it or not Vista is here and one day XP will not. Who knows, maybe Vista will go the way of ME and be replaced by something better? The point is that people have a choice to make - hang on to XP as long as its still viable, move to some Linux distro or the Mac world with the attendant trade offs that come with reduced support in software/hardware base to choose from or stay with Microsoft's current offering. Like it or not the largest user base for any OS will dictate who has the most software, etc. to choose from. Third party support will follow the masses.

I currently do not choose to shift over entirely to Linux or a Mac for the above stated reasons. At some point I will have to confront Vista at work, like it or not. That is reality. I believe that just happened to you. I prefer to learn it and be used to it before that happens. Advances in hardware will offset the "slowness" of Vista that is most apparent on machines using yesterday's hardware. The same thing happened in 2001. Gaming is not the biggest thing in my life. For now though I still mostly run AH and two other of what will shortly be called "legacy" games under XP. NO, I didn't call AH a legacy game - I mean the other two. For applications I haven't sat around with a stopwatch timing boot times and application performance. Personal perception does just fine for me and probably the majority of users. I do not perceive any slowdown in application performance. Its not wishful thinking on my part. I have no interest in being a Bill Gates/MS lover and groupie or a pitchfork wielding MS hater/Bill Gates-is-the-Devil angry villager either. Once again, it is what it is.

I have stayed on the sidelines for most of this discussion. I haven't been nor am I now interested in a pissing match of words to see who will be declared the "winner" with the attendant laurels of the AH forum. Vista is here. XP will die. Eventually Vista will be replaced with something else. Its real simple. Those who don't like what MS offers are free to vote with their feet. They always have been.

Republic - I have read the Technet threads and others re: the extreme lag with file copy/transfer times. I don't doubt that its happening for some but I personally have not seen it either in local disk or network operations so far.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #224 on:** April 01, 2007, 01:14:08 PM »

I have a problem when anyone comes into the the forums and makes blanket statements about how good Vista is. All of a sudden, I get phone calls and emails raking me over the coals as people read these things and it sets thier perspective.

With said perspective set, they go ballistic when it does not run right and they blame us (HTC) for the problems.

So, whenever anyone remotely alludes to Vista being peachy-keen, I will be right behind them to help reduce the expectation that something like that sets.

And it is not matter of what you like. MS is forcing this down everyone's throat. Of course, as a monopoly they can do that.