Vista user

killadoob said:
just thought i would quote this and then make you think why i would bash your beloved linux

see the thing i really dislike about you linux okes is you can bash vista but let a vista user say one bad word against linux and your all like omw how can he bash linux

stop bashing vista and i'll stop bashing linux because i dont really care what OS ppl use but i do care that ppl who dont use vista bash it
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand. If I dislike Vista enough to bash it, surely I am not going to keep using it? Obviously I'm not gonna use it, I think it is a horrible OS. It's like complaining about the chips being stale whilst continuing to eat them. Your entire point is based around the fact that I have not had experience of Vista, yet how can you be so sure? Have you been keeping tabs on my PC usage? I'm not the type of person to bash something without understanding it, mainly because I am not religious :D
However, that doesn't change the fact that I was making an argument against Vista, apropos of nothing. I was not saying "Linux is better", I was merely stating that Vista is a pointless OS, how you read anything vaguely "pro-Linux" in that single sentence I do not know. It is like me saying that Mercedes is crap and you automatically assuming I am comparing them to BMWs.

Vista, apropos of nothing, is a failure as an operating system.
 
how can u understand vista but not know how to turn off the user account control but i guess your so good with vista you would know what turning off that does :) which would solve one of your problems

also pressing f8 would disable another point of yours but i guess your more interested in bashing vista than actually trying to figure out your problems :)

i guess i am way to passionate about vista

tell me something though before i stop this arguement

does linux have 0 problems? apart from obvious gaming problem does linux work with every piece of hardware flawlessly?, does linux run your massive programs like photoshop and corel flawlessly? could linux run pastel SAP quickbooks etc?

even xp has problems BSOD being the major one
 
Last edited:
Why are you so desperate to turn this into a Windows/Linux debate? This has nothing to do with problems, it has to do with inherently bad design. I feel that Vista is badly designed, right from the user interaction down to the hardware interfacing. It is a RAM-hungry, sloathenly beast, and I do not like it. Yes I am sure Vista has some shiny, pretty features, but it is not enough of a step up to warrant me changing to it from XP, never mind paying the enormous price for it.

And of course Linux has problems, but you know what? If Linux cost R1600 a pop, it probably wouldn't.
 
killadoob said:
yea i suppose you get what you pay for :)
Click to expand...

Well considering you clearly forked out a minimum of R1500 for an OS that required almost a year's worth of updates and an entire service pack to become even remotely usable, I think your statement may be somewhat off...
 
do you have to pay for windows? never knew that :)

i dont mind paying the 2k i did for windows :)

i mostly game and work alot on corel draw and photoshop so considering i fork out 4k for corel and nearly 6k for photoshop 2k hardly seems alot
 
Last edited:
killadoob said:
do you have to pay for windows? never knew that :)

i dont mind paying the 2k i did for windows :)

i mostly game and work alot on corel draw and photoshop so considering i fork out 4k for corel and nearly 6k for photoshop 2k hardly seems alot
Click to expand...

2k seems a lot considering one can get a better operating system for free :D

/thread over
 
killadoob said:
do you have to pay for windows? never knew that :)

i dont mind paying the 2k i did for windows :)

i mostly game and work alot on corel draw and photoshop so considering i fork out 4k for corel and nearly 6k for photoshop 2k hardly seems alot
Click to expand...
was i suppose to pay for photoshop cs3:eek:,or was it for the keygenerator with legal updates:D
 
many times i see a vs thing..let me tell you i go for the OS thats easy to use and in my case its xp and vista.
I find it hard to work with linux, as ubuntu was a real headache for me and i tried using it for at least 3 weeks.
ONE thing i do know is that linux does require internet connection,without it it will be very difficult
 
Guys do it like this

If you like XP: USE XP!
If you like Vista: USE VISTA
If you like Linux: Use Linux

At the end of the day use your own OS and don't go around bashing another one!
 
killadoob said:
when xp first came out it was dodgy but a year later it was awesome
Click to expand...

Nonsense. I used Windows ME when Vista came out and prior to that
Win98 and both sucked. The problem was their 32bit with 16bit legacy
DOS code thing. One app crashed - your system became unstable.
When I bought XP Upgrade the moment it came out (at a discount too)
it worked like a bomb on my GeForce2 PentiumII 350MHz 128MB RAM
system. It suddenly became ROCK solid. OMW!!!

I've used NT before but that sucked at games. Suddenly an MS
OS both ran games and ran solidly. What a shock.

My newest laptop is a CY7 Panasonic Toughbook with XP of course.

Oh yes, I use a Mac for video editing :).

Vista = GARBAGE.
 
Threads like this always amaze me. The majority of us read blogs, forum threads and writeups on hardware and software applications and think that because they said it's crap it has to be so. Windows is designed to run on almost any PC both old and new. That in itself is a feat. Vista will and can run on fairly old hardware, but let's face it, it doesn't like to. Install Vista with SP1 on new generation hardware with lots of RAM and watch it fly!

Each of our experiences with Vista will differ depending on our hardware specs, applications and usage. As has been mentioned, if XP works for you then use it, but don't slam an OS just because it doesn't run to your expectations. The boys at Redmond spent 5 years developing Vista. When it was released we couldn't be blamed for thinking they sat on their hands, but in reality most of the bugs were hardware and third party driver issues.There are a lot of things built into Vista that we don't see or know about. Security being the main one. The most obvious of these that everyone complains about is the User Account Control. At least MS give you the option to turn it off. Otherwise the hidden features are like the safety features of a luxury car. We know they there but we hope like hell we never have to use them.

I still remember the die hards who swore by Win 98 who vowed never to upgrade to XP. Now 98 is a distant memory for most of us. You can't stop progress. They already working on a new version of windows. One day XP will be a distant memory. As will Vista. Of course the hardware requirements are going to be higher and RAM usage more demanding. You can't expect to run todays applications on yesteryears equipment.

Sometimes I think people who use Vista and love it are too afraid to admit it for fear of being flamed. I'm using Vista Ultimate 64bit on a P35 Gigabyte board with 4 Gigs of ram and I think it's the next best thing since sliced bread.
For those who are wondering, no I do not work for MS, I will not receive any payment for this plug and I am not a great fan of Mr. Gates.
I have however taken the time to read up on the workings of Vista at well known third party sites run by very knowledgeable people and not on forum posts where information is freely given by the misaligned, misguided and misinformed.
 
I use Vista on a machine that I bought specifically for that task.

Things i have noticed. Vista likes dual core or more.Vista likes RAM
Vista likes modern hardware and that does not surprise me considering M$ are not building for people in africa who insist on staying in the dark ages but are thinking of an OS that has to have a lifespan for atleast 3 years.

I have had no stability issues with Vista. I have had a tonne of compatibility issues with older apps but over time i got new apps or updates and thus far everything is fine (just like i had with XP)

Today i installed SP1 on my lap top and work machine which both run Vista. guess what not a hitch and in fact some decent improvements especially with regard to copying files etc.

I can honestly say i will NEVER look back to XP again. And I must say i enjoy Vista's stability especially when an app does fall over.

So to answer the question around dual boot - Not really worth it unless you have some apps that you NEED to use and that only work in XP.

Xp was a fine OS, dont get me wrong. Vista had some major teething problems and very very very fussy over hardware, but then i remember how i had to buy a new scanner when i got XP.

Way i see it. a year from now we will probably all be on Vista and be moaning like little girls when the new M$ OS comes out.

Otherwise if you are completely unhappy get a MAC.
 
Winga said:
Threads like this always amaze me. The majority of us read blogs, forum threads and writeups on hardware and software applications and think that because they said it's crap it has to be so. Windows is designed to run on almost any PC both old and new. That in itself is a feat. Vista will and can run on fairly old hardware, but let's face it, it doesn't like to. Install Vista with SP1 on new generation hardware with lots of RAM and watch it fly!.
Click to expand...

Well that sure explains why the multinational my father works for with an annual turnover of billions of dollars has refused to adopt Vista (after some major issues when they tried) and still insists on paying extra to load their new PCs and laptops with XP.

There just isn't any credible reason to upgrade to Vista. Vista requires more resources to do the same thing, it nags you to death and enterprise users have noticed that. XP/2K on the other hand replaced Win98/ME which
ran on DOS and had a 64kb GDI stack! One app crashed your whole system became unstable too, and would inevitably require rebooting.

Vista has cute Aero though! Not.....

Cute little article:
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;1155325152;fp;2;fpid;2;pf;1

In short, wait for the next Windows release, stick with XP.
 
halicon said:
...considering M$ are not building for people in africa who insist on staying in the dark ages but are thinking of an OS that has to have a lifespan for atleast 3 years.
Click to expand...

Which explains why a 1.2-1.6Ghz C2D Intel is the most popular laptop CPU
range used by business users in Japan, with 1 GB-2GB RAM max to accompany it.
MS, my friend is a cr@ppola company which artificially crippled HALO2
to leverage it to assist it in increasing Vista over XP adoption. Of course
its possible to play Halo 2 on XP as well with an easy software hack,
but there are MS ethics for you.
 
vista does not nag you to death

its only ppl who dont take the time to figure out why its nagging and how to turn it off, then they say ahhhhhhh vista is rubbish but they never understood vista and called it rubbish

peter i have no idea wtf your using still using DOS but dont blame microsoft because DOS is over my friend

how can u expect vista to run on slow hardware
xp never ran on p1 with 64 meg ram did it?
yet when we all had to upgrade for xp everyone was happy to

xp had plenty teething problems, scanners with no drivers printers with no drivers

plz vista and xp are the same in they both started out dodgy and have become amazing OS's
 
You want to know what my big issue with Vista is? The user-interface.

Sure, you are welcome to disagree, but I am unable to use it because the interface is too sluggish. Not sluggish in the sense that it is slow, I mean let's be honest, if you have a PC capable of running Vista (which I do, by the way), it is gonna be fast, the issue is the speed at which one can accomplish things. I can get a lot more done in a lot less time (or clicks) on XP or Linux than I can in Vista, and this annoys me. I don't care if the OS is prettier or faster, for me a big aspect is the ease with which I should be able to accomplish basic things, and I just found myself getting frustrated with Vista because I couldn't do basic things at the speed to which I was accustomed.

My argument against Vista is also that it isn't really a "worthy" upgrade to XP. I mean let's think about the difference between Windows 98 and XP, it was huge, I mean Microsoft went from running a "Windows shell" on a DOS platform to a fully-functional GUI OS. So what about the upgrade from XP to Vista? Not so much. All that has changed is that it is prettier, more difficult to navigate, more RAM-hungry and slightly more stable, all for a marginal performance-increase (and some people swear their games still run better on XP). So there it is, although some people may now swear by Vista, and I admit I shouldn't bash an OS as it is each to his own, however my personal feeling is that it is not a worthy upgrade to XP, no where near a "next generation" OS, and no where near worth paying the +-R1.5k to upgrade to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X