Jump to content

XP and Vista ???


Chrome

Recommended Posts

-1

I'm using Vista Home Premium 64 and loving it :D

Then you must not do much on your computer except what Microsoft tells you to do......

Install an ATI SLI video card....

Install any Symantec enterprise product....

Try to play Halo....

Try using anything Novell related....

Try using any Adobe/Macromedia product like Photoshop or Coldfusion....

Try mapping a network drive to a Samba server....

Try using Roxio to burn CDs....

The list of my personal experiences goes on and on and on.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then you must not do much on your computer except what Microsoft tells you to do......

Install an ATI SLI video card....

---Actually, I'm using a ATI Radeon 4870x2, which is technically an "SLI" solution because it is 2 GPU's on a card, and it runs just fine; best video card I've ever owned...dominates Far Cry 2, Crysis, Crysis: Warhead, and everything else I can throw at it at 1920x1080 resolution with max settings in DX9 and DX10 modes. Also, there is no ATI SLI, it's called Crossfire.

Install any Symantec enterprise product....

---AVG is better, why bother with Symantec?

Try to play Halo....

---I have a 360 next to and connected to the same 37" monitor as my computer for a reason ;)

Try using anything Novell related....

---Nope.

Try using any Adobe/Macromedia product like Photoshop or Coldfusion....

---Photoshop CS3 runs like a top on my system.

Try mapping a network drive to a Samba server....

---Nope.

Try using Roxio to burn CDs....

---Roxio? What is this, 1999? A gutted, streamlined Nero 6 does the job better than anything I've tried so far.

The list of my personal experiences goes on and on and on.........

---Sorry Vista didn't work out for you, but that doesn't mean it's terrible. I've been running it for several months now, and have had nearly zero issues that havn't been resolved with a few minutes of thought and effort. So far, about the only thing I don't like about it is the driver signature enforcement...although that is disabled entirely with 3 keystrokes during boot up.

*edit*

Lol, seriously? An article from well over a year ago? I'm not going to bother with all 20 points, but: 1) Yeah, actually it does. How do you explain the fact that ALL of my hardware runs just fine? 3) see number 1. 10) Start>control Panel>Programs and Features...O NOES THEY RENAMED IT *head asplode. 13) No shit, firefox runs ten times better than IE7 on ANY operating system...IE /= vista. 14) Disable it really kills resources that much and if you really can't afford to shell out 20$ for a gig of ram. 18) *right clicks* I spy with my little eye...an "open with" option!

:rolleyes:

*edit again*

http://www.googlefight.net/?kw1=i%20hate%20vista&kw2=i%20hate%20linux

"i hate vista" = 1,670,000 results vs "i hate linux" 1,850,000 results

:rolleyes:x2

Edited by Harb67
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then you must not do much on your computer except what Microsoft tells you to do......

Install an ATI SLI video card....

---Actually, I'm using a ATI Radeon 4870x2, which is technically an "SLI" solution because it is 2 GPU's on a card. Also, there is no ATI SLI, it's called Crossfire.

Install any Symantec enterprise product....

---AVG is better, why bother with Symantec?

Try to play Halo....

---I have a 360 next to and connected to the same 37" monitor as my computer for a reason ;)

Try using anything Novell related....

---Nope.

Try using any Adobe/Macromedia product like Photoshop or Coldfusion....

---Photoshop CS3 runs like a top on my system.

Try mapping a network drive to a Samba server....

---Nope.

Try using Roxio to burn CDs....

---Roxio? What is this, 1999? A gutted, streamlined Nero 6 does the job better than anything I've tried so far.

The list of my personal experiences goes on and on and on.........

---Sorry Vista didn't work out for you, but that doesn't mean it's terrible. I've been running it for several months now, and have had nearly zero issues that havn't been resolved with a few minutes of thought and effort. So far, about the only thing I don't like about it is the driver signature enforcement...although that is disabled entirely with 3 keystrokes during boot up.

I have an ATI Radeon 4870 that will not function on Vista. I have the dreaded driver stopped responding error.

AVG doesn't offer a decent enterprise product.

Photoshop and any other graphic resource intensive software causes every install I have of Vista to crash. I'm using CS4.

Nero is way too bloated.

We have roughly 1000 PCs here at work (I'm thinking that number is low, but 1000 is to be safe). We are not moving to Vista because of all the problems. We cannot get it to run consistently. Instead, we've created VMware instances running Vista that we launch within XP. That why when (not if) Vista crashes, it's as easy as restarting the image. I personally have Vista Ultimate 64bit on my laptop and Vista Home Premium 32bit at home (it's what came with it). Both suck. I never thought I'd say this, but I love XP compared to Vista. If XP 64bit didn't blow gigantic chunks, I'd be running it.

Sorry man, but Vista sucks. Maybe it's a learning curve, but I don't think so. I wouldn't advise upgrading to Vista to anyone unless all they use are Microsoft products made for Vista. 3rd party products aren't worth a shit on Vista.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an ATI Radeon 4870 that will not function on Vista. I have the dreaded driver stopped responding error.

---Could very easily be the card itself. I know for a fact that the 4870 in general is perfectly compatible with Vista 32 and 64. RMA it?

AVG doesn't offer a decent enterprise product.

---Good thing I'm not an enterprise eh?

Photoshop and any other graphic resource intensive software causes every install I have of Vista to crash. I'm using CS4.

---Can't say much here; CS3 runs fine for me though I have heard a wide range of reactions to running various builds of Photoshop in general on Vista.

Nero is way too bloated.

---I completely agree, hence why I prefer to use an older version of Nero 6 with all the fluff removed instead of the train wreck that is Nero 8.

I used XP for years and years up until building this new computer in late August. So far, Vista has been more stable and much more user friendly than XP ever was. For every person like yourself who hates Vista, you'll find someone like me who really likes it. Just because you've had some problems with it doesn't mean Vista sucks. I have no qualms about recomending it to people; it's going on the system I'm building for my nephews and it'll likely end up on my parents computer sooner rather than later (I've had XP on that system forever and I've already had to do 2 formats within the past 2 months...I hate doing tech support for family)/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sure vista runs fine on a computer with 2 48xx graphics cards. fwiw, vista is pretty if you have a system that can handle it, and ive had few (if any) problems with my dell laptop that were vista related. the problem is that is uses memory like a hog, and its generally just a rushed piece of code. most people who dont deal with thousands of computers on a daily basis or dont give two shits about whats happening behind the curtain, this works out fine. it looks good and works.

for older systems, or even newer ones that are cheaper and dont have 4 GB of ram to throw at an OS, XP works fine and dandy. has nobody heard the news about the class action lawsuit about the "vista capable" debacle?

and windows 7 is not just a repackaged vista. it is what vista should have been. if everything microsoft is putting out about it right now is true, it will definitely be something i buy when it gets released. i would suggest going to www.gizmodo.com and searching "windows 7" for some decent articles on why people are excited about W7 (and these are people that dont care much for microsoft or windows vista)

Edited by Benyen Soljax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

for older systems, or even newer ones that are cheaper and dont have 4 GB of ram to throw at an OS, XP works fine and dandy. has nobody heard the news about the class action lawsuit about the "vista capable" debacle?

I will agree with you there. One of the main problems with Vista is people trying to put it on older machines that simply aren't up to the task. Yes, the "vista capable" thing was complete bullshit, but that's more of a knock against Microsoft themselves rather than the operating system. Sure, Vista likes its memory. But let's be serious; memory is cheap as hell these days. You can snag 4 gigs of DDR2-800 for less than fifty bucks, and that is more than enough to run Vista flawlessly (hell, most users won't even use all 4 gigs...isn't it time we ALL upgraded to 64-bit OS's?). Back when it first came out, you did need a fairly expensive computer to really handle Vista, but nowadays that simply isn't the case.

Bottom line, in my opinion, is: if you've got the rig for it, get Vista over XP and don't look back. Hell, even if you don't have the rig for it, it's pretty cheap and painless to get your box up to snuff. XP came out 6 years before Vista, and Vista has been out for nearly a year itself. Keeping up with the times isn't nearly as expensive and scary as some people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vista is more like Windows ME. It just plain sucks, and will be replaced shortly.

The front side of vista is pretty, and user friendly. When you start delving into the guts of the software, it is just plain horrible. I have never seen such an ass backwards way to put things together. Just what until something breaks, or doesn't work. Then tell me how much you enjoy it. :)

Any sort of third party software runs like crap, or just doesn't run at all. Especially Novell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will agree with you there. One of the main problems with Vista is people trying to put it on older machines that simply aren't up to the task. Yes, the "vista capable" thing was complete bullshit, but that's more of a knock against Microsoft themselves rather than the operating system. Sure, Vista likes its memory. But let's be serious; memory is cheap as hell these days. You can snag 4 gigs of DDR2-800 for less than fifty bucks, and that is more than enough to run Vista flawlessly (hell, most users won't even use all 4 gigs...isn't it time we ALL upgraded to 64-bit OS's?). Back when it first came out, you did need a fairly expensive computer to really handle Vista, but nowadays that simply isn't the case.

Bottom line, in my opinion, is: if you've got the rig for it, get Vista over XP and don't look back. Hell, even if you don't have the rig for it, it's pretty cheap and painless to get your box up to snuff. XP came out 6 years before Vista, and Vista has been out for nearly a year itself. Keeping up with the times isn't nearly as expensive and scary as some people think.

The wife and I bought a brand new HP. It came with Vista. It sucks. I didn't try to upgrade an older machine. You know it's bad when every PC manufacturer is offering XP as an option on their machines still. Most businesses are refusing to move to Vista.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...