Should i get vista? - Printable Version
-Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net)
+-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Forum: Skype & Technology (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Tech Talk (/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+----- Thread: Should i get vista? (/showthread.php?tid=75970)
Should i get vista? by cpt.talon on 07-09-2007 at 01:33 AM
im thinking about getting vista but im not sure.
would i have to upgrade my processor and everything for vista to run properly?
and does vista have msn as well?
RE: Should i get vista? by Kenji on 07-09-2007 at 01:39 AM
Depends on your system specs, post them here.
quote:No, You need to download it.
Originally posted by cpt.talon
and does vista have msn as well?
RE: Should i get vista? by Stigmata on 07-09-2007 at 01:39 AM
yes Vista is compatible with Windows Live Messenger..
In my personal opinion I'd wait at least a year before upgrading to Windows Vista, and even then I prob wouldnt even bother.
Just have to think is spending all that money really worth it?
How old is your computer? If oldish, then why not let your computer die out and save up for a new brand spanking new one one that will work just lovely with vista, and will be compatible with old parts from your old pc?
RE: Should i get vista? by Jhrono on 07-09-2007 at 01:40 AM
Ofcourse Vista runs Windows Live Messenger, as many other programs, especially the 32 bits version.
Vista is quite pleasent to use, I find it worth every penny.
By the way, can you tell us your computer specifications? Thanks 
RE: Should i get vista? by MeEtc on 07-09-2007 at 01:40 AM
quote:The Upgrade Advisor from Microsoft will tell you if your PC is compatible
Originally posted by cpt.talon
im thinking about getting vista but im not sure.
would i have to upgrade my processor and everything for vista to run properly?
quote:Windows Live Messenger is fully compatible with Windows Vista
Originally posted by cpt.talon
and does vista have msn as well?
quote:
Originally posted by Microsoft
What is required to run Windows Vista?
If you purchased a PC in the last two years, chances are good that you can run Windows Vista. To install and run the core functionality of Windows Vista, you need:
* An 800 MHz processor
* 512 MB of RAM
* A 20 GB hard drive with 15 GB of free space
RE: Should i get vista? by cpt.talon on 07-09-2007 at 01:44 AM
oh well, my comp is old...lol.
might as well wait a bit nd buy a whole new computer
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Verte on 07-09-2007 at 01:57 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Stigmata
Just have to think is spending all that money really worth it?
Amen. Is it worth $$$ to you? Buying Vista means less money for other things, so you've got to make sure it's worth your while to upgrade.
RE: Should i get vista? by Woraug on 07-09-2007 at 02:52 AM
Just wait to get Vista. In about a year or so, the majority of the kinks and incompatibilities will be worked out. Don't you guys remember when XP first released? Everyone said that it was crap, don't get it, nothing works with it. Basically, the same things that are wrong with Vista right now. Have some patience, it'll get better (hopefully).
RE: Should i get vista? by -dt- on 07-09-2007 at 06:26 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Woraug
Just wait to get Vista. In about a year or so, the majority of the kinks and incompatibilities will be worked out. Don't you guys remember when XP first released? Everyone said that it was crap, don't get it, nothing works with it. Basically, the same things that are wrong with Vista right now. Have some patience, it'll get better (hopefully).
nothing works with it?, what are you on?, the only things that dont work are dodgy games and some badly coded programsIve been using vista since beta 2 and other than the dodgy nvidia drivers everything works fine for me
RE: Should i get vista? by vaccination on 07-09-2007 at 06:51 AM
quote:Amen.
Originally posted by -dt-
Ive been using vista since beta 2 and other than the dodgy nvidia drivers everything works fine for me
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Woraug on 07-09-2007 at 09:48 AM
quote:
Originally posted by -dt-
quote:
Originally posted by Woraug
Just wait to get Vista. In about a year or so, the majority of the kinks and incompatibilities will be worked out. Don't you guys remember when XP first released? Everyone said that it was crap, don't get it, nothing works with it. Basically, the same things that are wrong with Vista right now. Have some patience, it'll get better (hopefully).
Ive been using vista since beta 2 and other than the dodgy nvidia drivers everything works fine for me
I was exaggerating...
RE: Should i get vista? by absorbation on 07-09-2007 at 11:20 AM
I'm actually disappointed with Vista, it is still not user-friendly enough and it had so much more potential 
.
You can read my thoughts at my blog if your interested 
RE: Should i get vista? by Chris4 on 07-09-2007 at 11:26 AM
[offtopic]Nice blog absorbation 
[/offtopic]
Well I won't be getting Vista until I hear of some improvements.
RE: Should i get vista? by John Anderton on 07-09-2007 at 11:32 AM
I hate people who bash vista just because they can. Just because it won't work on their (old) pcs. Just because everyone else is doing it. Just because they have nothing better to do.
Vista is a really good OS. I find it worth every penny. All the apps work fine on it. There is an occasional odd ball though. Its just because the app was badly coded. If a game isn't working, there is a small upgrade patch to solve your problems most of the time though none of the games I had needed them.
There are a few lazy companies who haven't created their apps/drivers for their hardware etc correctly.
Yahoo (for messenger), Pinnacle (for TV card support) and NVIDIA (for Graphic card drivers) are some of them.
Yahoo seems to have forgotten about the Vista version of messenger which was supposed to use Expression.
Pinnacle has been working on it for 8 months. They have a few things out but if you have a really old card (mine is 4 years old) then probably you will have a few issues. There are other 3rd party apps that work perfectly though viz. K!TV
NVIDIA is letting out monthly betas of the graphics drivers. They seem to be improving Lets hope they make a perfect driver soon enough. One which doesn't make you uninstall some other driver to install or one that doesn't lag games randomly at times
This is retrospect is nothing considering the number of features you have at your disposal. I would say, from a technical standpoint, Vista is certainly worth the upgrade. From a financial one, its up to you to decide but I for one felt its well worth the price you pay
Update:
quote:Please don't. It is comments like that which make new users fear it. It is comments like that which make newbies walk around bitching about vista when in reality they haven't even used it for more than 5 minutes.
Originally posted by Woraug
I was exaggerating...
RE: Should i get vista? by Jhrono on 07-09-2007 at 12:35 PM
quote:AMEN!
Originally posted by John Anderton
I hate people who bash vista just because they can. Just because it won't work on their (old) pcs. Just because everyone else is doing it. Just because they have nothing better to do.
quote:
Originally posted by John Anderton
Vista is a really good OS. I find it worth every penny. All the apps work fine on it. There is an occasional odd ball though. Its just because the app was badly coded. If a game isn't working, there is a small upgrade patch to solve your problems most of the time though none of the games I had needed them.
quote:Finally, vista non-haters start to rise.. Baaah..
Originally posted by Jhrono
Ofcourse Vista runs Windows Live Messenger, as many other programs, especially the 32 bits version.
Vista is quite pleasent to use, I find it worth every penny.
90% of you talk about "what you've heard" and shit, and where does that get us?
RE: Should i get vista? by Kenji on 07-09-2007 at 01:11 PM
quote:Same here.
Originally posted by -dt-
quote:
Originally posted by Woraug
Just wait to get Vista. In about a year or so, the majority of the kinks and incompatibilities will be worked out. Don't you guys remember when XP first released? Everyone said that it was crap, don't get it, nothing works with it. Basically, the same things that are wrong with Vista right now. Have some patience, it'll get better (hopefully).
Ive been using vista since beta 2 and other than the dodgy nvidia drivers everything works fine for me
quote:
Originally posted by John Anderton
I hate people who bash vista just because they can. Just because it won't work on their (old) pcs. Just because everyone else is doing it. Just because they have nothing better to do.
Vista is a really good OS. I find it worth every penny. All the apps work fine on it. There is an occasional odd ball though. Its just because the app was badly coded. If a game isn't working, there is a small upgrade patch to solve your problems most of the time though none of the games I had needed them.
There are a few lazy companies who haven't created their apps/drivers for their hardware etc correctly.
Yahoo (for messenger), Pinnacle (for TV card support) and NVIDIA (for Graphic card drivers) are some of them.
Yahoo seems to have forgotten about the Vista version of messenger which was supposed to use Expression.
Pinnacle has been working on it for 8 months. They have a few things out but if you have a really old card (mine is 4 years old) then probably you will have a few issues. There are other 3rd party apps that work perfectly though viz. K!TV
NVIDIA is letting out monthly betas of the graphics drivers. They seem to be improving
This is retrospect is nothing considering the number of features you have at your disposal. I would say, from a technical standpoint, Vista is certainly worth the upgrade. From a financial one, its up to you to decide but I for one felt its well worth the price you pay
Update:
quote:Please don't. It is comments like that which make new users fear it. It is comments like that which make newbies walk around bitching about vista when in reality they haven't even used it for more than 5 minutes.
Originally posted by Woraug
I was exaggerating...
Id just like to quote myself for what I posted on another forum
quote:
Originally posted by 'Dazzy'
I hate people that say "Vista sucks", "Vista is slow", "you need 500gigahutrz LOLZ" etc. Before I got this computer, I was running it fine on a P3 1GHz with 512MB ram and a nvidia FX 5200. It was even faster than XP was. sure, It would get a little sluggish at times when running things like Photoshop, What would you expect on a 7 year old machine? Vista does not require a "super computer" to run.
RE: Should i get vista? by -dt- on 07-09-2007 at 01:22 PM
quote:Error: Your comment is too long. The maximum lenght of a comment is 300 words.
Originally posted by absorbation
I'm actually disappointed with Vista, it is still not user-friendly enough and it had so much more potential (Smilie).
You can read my thoughts at my blog if your interested (Smilie)
your blog sucks
quote:
Originally posted by the comment i wanted to submit
pft, this is just crap
quote:why should microsoft add support for AAC? all DRM is just silly.
I cannot play my music I legally downloaded from iTunes. I feel ripped off all because Microsoft is scared of the AACs!
quote:rofl at not being user friendly.
I finally sat down to install the thing and after a long, long, looooooooong wait, it installed. BUT... I am really, deeply, uncontrollable disappointed, it is like a flashy XP ... I thought Microsoft would make a user friendly OS for once.
In regard to the install time, the installer takes half the time the XP one does, and the vista install is alot more streamlined, unlike the XP one which keeps asking for more information every 2 seconds (highly annoying).
Vista is far far far more than a flashy xp, its based off server 2003 which is a nice stable code base.
They have also rewritten alot of things to make its easier for developers and for the users like the audio stack, one big feature that comes from this is the per application volume control which just rocks imo
Then theres the desktop window manager (aero) which allows for all those neat little effects (like winkey+tab and the live thumbnails which are shown when you hover over the start bar) by drawing the windows offscreen and then composited into the desktop.
and im sick of typing, just go google the changes
* -dt- goes back to watching star trek
RE: Should i get vista? by Mike on 07-09-2007 at 01:39 PM
quote:That's the only thing that sucks in Vista
Originally posted by -dt-
increased security
Other than that, Vista rocks.
RE: Should i get vista? by Adeptus on 07-09-2007 at 02:25 PM
quote:I do not share your opinion. Despite being able to buy perfectly legal Vista at about 90% discount, I find that Vista Ultimate is not worth even $65 to me. I'd sooner pay to not have to use it.
Originally posted by John Anderton
This is retrospect is nothing considering the number of features you have at your disposal. I would say, from a technical standpoint, Vista is certainly worth the upgrade. From a financial one, its up to you to decide but I for one felt its well worth the price you pay
My objection is not about hardware requirements (I have decent hardware). Besides the eye candy, I find most of the changes MS has made in Vista completely obnoxious and as far the "new features" go, MS can shove them. The job of the OS is to run applications and, quite frankly, XP seems to do that better.
I feel that MS has gone in completely the wrong direction with Vista. It is unfortunate that there is no real competition, so despite being trash, it will still sell and eventually, thanks to Microsoft's product lifecycle polices, even I will find myself forced to use it. However, I don't plan to do so any sooner than I absolutely must.
For the original poster, I would suggest looking at the upgrade decision as a "why do it?" question rather than "why not?" -- what does Vista have that you really need and don't have in XP? If the answer is "nothing" or "I don't know", then save your money and sanity.
RE: Should i get vista? by Kenji on 07-09-2007 at 02:30 PM
quote:Stfu mac fanboy
Originally posted by Adeptus
quote:I do not share your opinion. Despite being able to buy perfectly legal Vista at about 90% discount, I find that Vista Ultimate is not worth even $65 to me. I'd sooner pay to not have to use it.
Originally posted by John Anderton
This is retrospect is nothing considering the number of features you have at your disposal. I would say, from a technical standpoint, Vista is certainly worth the upgrade. From a financial one, its up to you to decide but I for one felt its well worth the price you pay
My objection is not about hardware requirements (I have decent hardware). Besides the eye candy, I find most of the changes MS has made in Vista completely obnoxious and as far the "new features" go, MS can shove them. The job of the OS is to run applications and, quite frankly, XP seems to do that better.
I feel that MS has gone in completely the wrong direction with Vista. It is unfortunate that there is no real competition, so despite being trash, it will still sell and eventually, thanks to Microsoft's product lifecycle polices, even I will find myself forced to use it. However, I don't plan to do so any sooner than I absolutely must.
For the original poster, I would suggest looking at the upgrade decision as a "why do it?" question rather than "why not?" -- what does Vista have that you really need and don't have in XP? If the answer is "nothing" or "I don't know", then save your money and sanity.
* Kenji runs
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Verte on 07-10-2007 at 03:53 AM
quote:
Originally posted by John Anderton
There are a few lazy companies who haven't created their apps/drivers for their hardware etc correctly.
Yahoo (for messenger), Pinnacle (for TV card support) and NVIDIA (for Graphic card drivers) are some of them.
Eh, blame the other vendors.. No.
It would be naive to draw a parallel between, say, the lack of wireless drivers for some suppliers on GNU/Linux. It's not something we should excuse G/L for, either it works or it doesn't, and until it does, if I need to support crappy wireless card X and don't have coding experince and a few days of time and effort to reverse engineer other drivers, I'm going to have to go elsewhere.
It would be naive specifically because, these products worked on the previous version of Windows, which Microsoft have access to the source and manuals of. In other words, it's something that THEY broke, and have the ability to fix.
I'm not saying that things won't get fixed, but I've got to wonder why you'd be paying money for something with the promise it will work Real Soon Now. Why not stick with something that works for the moment, and then when you know you will get more positive than negative out of the move, make the switch.
RE: Should i get vista? by Voldemort on 07-10-2007 at 03:58 AM
quote:Happens with pretty much every other windows version...
Originally posted by John Anderton
I hate people who bash vista just because they can. Just because it won't work on their (old) pcs. Just because everyone else is doing it. Just because they have nothing better to do.
RE: Should i get vista? by John Anderton on 07-10-2007 at 07:01 AM
Adeptii, no one is saying that you should spend all that cash on Ultimate. There are other versions that are perfectly fine and don't burn holes in your pockets
quote:I agree. You can't expect an old machine to run an OS as smoothly as a new one. If you have to, switch off glass and the other eye candy. Its not like its of any use other than making you drool the first time around
Originally posted by Dazzy
I hate people that say "Vista sucks", "Vista is slow", "you need 500gigahutrz LOLZ" etc. Before I got this computer, I was running it fine on a P3 1GHz with 512MB ram and a nvidia FX 5200. It was even faster than XP was. sure, It would get a little sluggish at times when running things like Photoshop, What would you expect on a 7 year old machine? Vista does not require a "super computer" to run.
quote:That is what errs me. No one seems to remember how your apps didn't work perfectly with xp at first. How the old games didn't work despite the inclusion of a compatibility wizard. It seemed that the compatibility wizard never worked at all. Later however, this was fixed
Originally posted by Voldemort
Happens with pretty much every other windows version...
Its sad how people bitch about an OS just because everyone else is. I'm sure that most people hadn't seen the RTM and were still bashing it due to public BETA 2 or for that matter, everyone else bashing it or even due to the fact that their old pcs wouldn't run vista at all.
If you really want to run vista on your ancient box, switch off all the eye candy but you probably won't have to since windows checks if it can carry the load before switching it on in the first place.
quote:I might be wrong but I was always of the view that the OS is made by a certain someone. You make your apps/hardware (with drivers) for that OS and in doing so, need to make sure that your app/hardware works fine. If your app/driver works fine with the OS one day and the next day it breaks due to a patch on the OS, sure, go ahead and bitch about it to the OS creators.
Originally posted by Verte
It would be naive specifically because, these products worked on the previous version of Windows, which Microsoft have access to the source and manuals of. In other words, it's something that THEY broke, and have the ability to fix.
But if its a new OS all together, like vista is here, you are the one who is responsible for making your app work on their OS since its not the OS that is running on your app, its your app running on the OS
Conversely, if you are the one making a processor/motherboard, the people who make the OS will make sure that they support your architecture..
As I said, I might be wrong with this whole thing of course
RE: Should i get vista? by Adeptus on 07-10-2007 at 09:10 AM
quote:I wasn't complaining about cost at all. As I said, I personally can get Ultimate for about $65 and I still don't think it's worth it. The other versions are obviously not even worth considering.
Originally posted by John Anderton
Adeptii, no one is saying that you should spend all that cash on Ultimate. There are other versions that are perfectly fine and don't burn holes in your pockets
quote:It's not a "new OS". The OS is "Windows" and Vista is just another incremental release.
Originally posted by John Anderton
But if its a new OS all together, like vista is here, you are the one who is responsible for making your app work on their OS
RE: Should i get vista? by Phillip on 07-10-2007 at 09:24 AM
quote:Your joking right..? Are you saying Microsoft should make sure all programs work fine on their OS..?
Originally posted by Verte
It would be naive specifically because, these products worked on the previous version of Windows, which Microsoft have access to the source and manuals of. In other words, it's something that THEY broke, and have the ability to fix.
quote:I have not had one single problem with Vista. Programs run just as fast as XP and even my games have more FPS than XP.
Originally posted by Verte
I'm not saying that things won't get fixed, but I've got to wonder why you'd be paying money for something with the promise it will work Real Soon Now. Why not stick with something that works for the moment, and then when you know you will get more positive than negative out of the move, make the switch.
Basically if you know what your doing, download a copy and try it out for the 30 days. Judge it for yourself.
RE: Should i get vista? by John Anderton on 07-10-2007 at 09:26 AM
quote:Why should I blame the vendors? The vendors sold me the hardware (Eg the pinnacle tv card that I own). Its been 4 years and thats well over the time they should provide support for. In fact, I've never asked any vendor for any support on any of my hardware ever (other than the time that the mobo on a pc I got died and had to be replaced).
Originally posted by Verte
Eh, blame the other vendors.. No.
The hardware manufacturers are responsible for making drivers that work.
They did provide support to their newer cards before they did for their older cards, a tactic I understand quite well. But my issue is, 7 months? Is that how long you take to make something?
Well they came out with a driver a few months back. Didn't work for me. Around the same time I got a driver for my hardware via winupdate and it worked. The only thing is that WMC doesn't detect my card as a tv card and the old pinnacle software won't work. Maybe a bit of manual hacking can fix it. If not, I'll have to download the 400+MB beta for it (which has been in beta for at least 4 months now
)quote:Point taken. But you know what I meant
Originally posted by Adeptus
It's not a "new OS". The OS is "Windows" and Vista is just another incremental release.
RE: Should i get vista? by Lux on 07-10-2007 at 09:29 AM
i don't have a "super" pc, it's 2.4ghz 1gb ram...bla bla..it is solid pc, and i tryed vista ultimate-worked just fine, but PERSONALY i don't like it... mostly....but is has potenicals... 
i like the visual expireance and in time i think that it will same like with XP....xp wasn't very acepted in a beggining, but later it was.....so probably it just meater of time, when it'll be most used OS....maybe on the next relese 
RE: Should i get vista? by CookieRevised on 07-10-2007 at 10:05 AM
A lot has been said in this thread and I think almost all possible views are presented here. You have Vista-haters and Vista-lovers, and a whole lot in between...
The parallels drawn with XP as far as bashing and that kind of stuff goes, is absolutely right. This happens with every new OS (and even service pack for an OS!!).
Anyways, I like to think I'm one of those not-hating-not-loving people.
I have used Vista (for more than 5 minutes) and still using it sometimes. It is installed as a dual boot on my laptop...
However, I do not use Vista as my main OS. Simply because most of my programs run perfectly fine in XP and because I am used to XP and know more about XP than Vista. So why should I use Vista? It is very eye-candy, but what runs in Vista, runs in XP too (and for the time being sometimes better).
If I wasn't able to buy Vista Ultimate at a very low price, I wouldn't have had it, not because it isn't good, but simply because I have no _real_ use for it...
If you just want the newest from the newest, or eye-catching stuff, then yes, by all means buy and install Vista. If you don't have a real need for it, don't buy it. XP is just as good.
And if you need a new PC, buy one which would be able to run Vista without a blink, but buy Windows XP.... This will save you money, and you could always later on, when Vista is at the point where XP is now, upgrade to Vista....
Vista is a very good OS, but if you are not a real computer savy guy and are very used to XP, I would say stick to XP for the time being.
quote:
Originally posted by Adeptus
For the original poster, I would suggest looking at the upgrade decision as a "why do it?" question rather than "why not?" -- what does Vista have that you really need and don't have in XP? If the answer is "nothing" or "I don't know", then save your money and sanity.
RE: Should i get vista? by John Anderton on 07-10-2007 at 10:15 AM
quote:But if I'm getting a new PC, I would prefer getting Vista because I know that a year or two down the line, Microsoft will stop support for XP. They have been planning this far before Vista Beta 2 came out.
Originally posted by CookieRevised
Vista is a very good OS, but if you are not a real computer savy guy and are very used to XP, I would say stick to XP for the time being.
Wouldn't you rather spend a few bucks more and get Vista Home Premium, an OS that will be supported by Microsoft?
I do agree with Adeptii asking "why do it?" and the best answer I can think of right now is the above one. There is also that other answer that if you're a dev, wouldn't you like to learn about gadgets and the other technologies that xp doesn't have?
Vista does have eye candy, that's for sure but that's not what vista is about tbh
quote:Good argument with the "runs in XP too" thing but the sometimes better isn't quite accurate. I personally found (and I think quite a few others have too) that games provide better performance (higher fps and sometimes smoother gameplay over all) on vista.
Originally posted by CookieRevised
runs in XP too (and for the time being sometimes better).
This did come as a shock to me, I must admit. I had expected quite the opposite since Vista is loaded with all that eye candy.
Not everything gives you better performance. Some normal apps might be faster on xp but quite a few graphics based apps seem to perform better on vista
As Adeptus said, if you can't come up with an answer to "why do it?" then don't bother spending the money. If you do have an answer (like I seemed to have
) then you could consider it
RE: Should i get vista? by CookieRevised on 07-10-2007 at 10:20 AM
quote:believe me that support for XP will not stop for a very long time! And it would take even a longer time before companies start to make Vista-only programs. Saying that support for XP will stop in a year or two is bullocks...
Originally posted by John Anderton
But if I'm getting a new PC, I would prefer getting Vista because I know that a year or two down the line, Microsoft will stop support for XP. They have been planning this far before Vista Beta 2 came out.
quote:
Originally posted by John Anderton
I do agree with Adeptii asking "why do it?" and the best answer I can think of right now is the above one. There is also that other answer that if you're a dev, wouldn't you like to learn about gadgets and the other technologies that xp doesn't have?
quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
...but if you are not a real computer savy guy...
Its very obvious that tech guys, people who love gadgets, etc might wanna have Vista. But those people wouldn't be asking if they need Vista in the first place! They already know they want it.
People who ask if they need Vista are in the first place people who aren't gadget lovers or real computer geeks, they are normal average home-pc users who use their PC for writing their homework, doing taxes and playing a game or two...
-----------------
Do you need that brand new car with all the latest gadgets and technology to bring you from point A to B? Or are you happy with that car which has prooven to be very stable on the road, which you know inside-out, etc?
If you're a car lover, of course you need to buy that new one. If you're an average guy, you might be better to spend the money on other things...
RE: Should i get vista? by Phillip on 07-10-2007 at 12:32 PM
Very well said Cookie.
But for all you Vista haters. Most of your arguments are just plain bs. Vista runs most things perfectly just as XP does.
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by andrewdodd13 on 07-10-2007 at 01:48 PM
quote:Quite true - in fact last I heard, Window 98 and ME support only ended on July 11 2006. That's 9 years after 98 was originally released, btw.
Originally posted by CookieRevised
quote:believe me that support for XP will not stop for a very long time! And it would take even a longer time before companies start to make Vista-only programs. Saying that support for XP will stop in a year or two is bullocks...
Originally posted by John Anderton
But if I'm getting a new PC, I would prefer getting Vista because I know that a year or two down the line, Microsoft will stop support for XP. They have been planning this far before Vista Beta 2 came out.
Now about the whole topic, there is practically nothing of use in Vista to people with a bit of tech. knowledge. Sure, eye-candy (and personally I want DreamSpace or whatever its called), and some (damned good compared to previous offerings) new games and it's a lot more "user friendly". (Excluding UAC, which is a pain in the rear end, especially if you're not tech. savvy enough to know how to turn it off...) But there's nothing totally amazing.
The main jump from 9x 16-bit-based kernels to the NT5 kernels was stability. No matter how hard you tried to keep everything running, Windows 9x would always occasionally fall over. And one or two badly coded apps could bring the whole system down. (Yes they can still do that on XP and Vista, but not to the same extent).
I have to admit though, I had Vista on my new laptop and wiped it in place of a dual-boot with XP and Kubuntu simply because I'm too lazy to learn where all my tricks have gone with Vista atm.
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Verte on 07-12-2007 at 04:58 AM
quote:
Originally posted by John Anderton
quote:I might be wrong but I was always of the view that the OS is made by a certain someone. You make your apps/hardware (with drivers) for that OS and in doing so, need to make sure that your app/hardware works fine. If your app/driver works fine with the OS one day and the next day it breaks due to a patch on the OS, sure, go ahead and bitch about it to the OS creators.
Originally posted by Verte
It would be naive specifically because, these products worked on the previous version of Windows, which Microsoft have access to the source and manuals of. In other words, it's something that THEY broke, and have the ability to fix.
But if its a new OS all together, like vista is here, you are the one who is responsible for making your app work on their OS since its not the OS that is running on your app, its your app running on the OS
Conversely, if you are the one making a processor/motherboard, the people who make the OS will make sure that they support your architecture..
As I said, I might be wrong with this whole thing of course
There hasn't been any major restructuring in the kernel. A few things have been changed and are a lot nicer, but it's still essentially the same. Which has to make you wonder why functionality from userland would be bad enough to break many programs and drivers. This suggests that not only have new system calls been added, but also older ones have been fundamentally changed. It'd make sense to provide functionality to allow programs to use the older calls as standard.
I guess it's more convoluted for drivers, particularly kernel resident drivers, and this is a problem for monolithic kernels in general [revisions of code that should be internal break real drivers in practice]. Maybe- I mean, I don't know exactly where the original driver and the new API clash.
quote:
Originally posted by Phillip
quote:Your joking right..? Are you saying Microsoft should make sure all programs work fine on their OS..?
Originally posted by Verte
It would be naive specifically because, these products worked on the previous version of Windows, which Microsoft have access to the source and manuals of. In other words, it's something that THEY broke, and have the ability to fix.
I'm saying that they should provide an API which behaves the same as the previous one, and that it isn't particularly difficult to do [gcc + glibc is my favourite example, supporting all sorts of standards from win32 to SYSV, through the *BSDs, XOpens, POSIXen, GNU, for many different standards of languages, ad nauseum].
I'm just thinking, if there is a chance applications will rely on outdated syscalls, they should be depreciated; but still available. Even if it's through some wrapper.
quote:
Originally posted by Phillip
quote:I have not had one single problem with Vista. Programs run just as fast as XP and even my games have more FPS than XP.
Originally posted by Verte
I'm not saying that things won't get fixed, but I've got to wonder why you'd be paying money for something with the promise it will work Real Soon Now. Why not stick with something that works for the moment, and then when you know you will get more positive than negative out of the move, make the switch.
Basically if you know what your doing, download a copy and try it out for the 30 days. Judge it for yourself.
Yeah, of course, it's most likely to work fine. That probability increases all the time. But if you're worried about it, there's no harm in waiting.
All I'm saying is, you've got to weigh up the potential downsides if some application you use isn't supported, and the fact that you will be paying $$$ to get it, with the upsides. What that means to you will be different to what it means to the next person. If I need application X for work and it just doesn't work on Vista, I'm less likely to make the move. If features A, B and C are worth $$$ to me, I'll really consider it.
RE: Should i get vista? by John Anderton on 07-12-2007 at 06:46 AM
Microsoft not giving good API is so last month's news. I still remember 6 months or so back Patchy not being able to add a proper thumb for flip 3d because there wasn't any half decent API
RE: Should i get vista? by Nefzen on 07-15-2007 at 08:40 PM
Microsoft have a very long history of doing things badly and annoyingly. I too have been pondering on the question whether to switch to Vista on my newer computer (without taking the cost of Vista into consideration at all). What worries me is the prospect of a bigger, heavier operating system which will suck the life out of other applications like some Microsoftic tumor (quite fits with Wirth's law which I just recently found )
XP by itself, though the many improvements take it's toll on the computer 
Sure with newer more powerful computers it won't matter so much, but I remember that on my last computer, with 600Mhz, it almost died when running both eMule and a movie (though I have to say, that was a terrible version of eMule).
What bothers me is that all those eye candies and other useless junk will slow things down. Sure, I can disable it, but then what's the point of that? It'll better to have some automatic turn off mechanism when you run something that doesn't need it.
As for all those gadgets and stuff, they have been existing in Macs and *nixes for some time now, and only now did Microsoft remember to add them. Then again rather than looking at it as a bad thing, the glass is half full: they finally added it. Only difference is that Macs and *nixes don't need some uber computer to run it. =/
I would really like to have some gadgets and eye candies on my desktop, I think they're cool. There are certain solutions, but they don't quite support right to left windows
Plus there's all that Creative Commons Right (or something like that). I hope to get past it, I've been told quite a lot of annoying things about it.
I think I'll stay with XP for a while and maybe then upgrade to Vista.
Only problem is that I think I should get the (seemingly at least) superior 64bit computer, which is known to be troublesome with XP
so... what do you think I should do?
RE: Should i get vista? by vaccination on 07-15-2007 at 08:53 PM
I run Vista Ultimate, on 2GB RAM and Core 2 Duo, I have no problems with running multiple applications. My memory usage never goes above 56% on normal use(which is generally a lot of apps open - including Photoshop CS3 an Dreamweaver.)
People need to realise that their systems are old, you want to run new exciting things, you need new(er) hardware. I don't understand why everyone has a problem with this, sure it costs you money, but no pain no gain.
EDIT:
quote:There is. All Aero features etc are turned off when you run a full screen application.
It'll better to have some automatic turn off mechanism when you run something that doesn't need it.
RE: Should i get vista? by Nefzen on 07-15-2007 at 10:06 PM
the thing is, some of the older computer can run this stuff . . .
though I wouldn't expect a 600Mhz computer to run it smoothly, not on Windows XP anyways (if some "good" (and by good I meant good programming, done well) 3rd party program would allow you to run it on XP)
btw I forgot to ask WHY THE HELL DOES IT NEED 15 GB OF FREE SPACE?!
hoping it doesn't actually use all the damn 15 GB >_>
RE: Should i get vista? by Kenji on 07-15-2007 at 10:09 PM
quote:I've installed it on a 20GB partition, its only using 10GB and that's with all my programs installed.
Originally posted by Nefzen
hoping it doesn't actually use all the damn 15 GB >_>
RE: Should i get vista? by andrewdodd13 on 07-15-2007 at 11:17 PM
The 15GB installation procedure is down to the fact that Microsoft for some reason decided to compress the entire install by too many factors (the file is around 2.6gb on a DVD, they could've used a DVD-9, but nooo....), so the installer extracts the entire content of the file to the hard drive, and then copies the files to their new locations.
Also, you need to factor in Swap Space and System Restore points, etc., etc.
RE: Should i get vista? by Nefzen on 07-16-2007 at 10:33 AM
bleh >_<
what about 64bit PC? I've been told that 64bit XP has lots of problem, so should I really buy a new computer that's 64bit?
RE: Should i get vista? by andrewdodd13 on 07-16-2007 at 04:26 PM
Just use 32 bit XP on a 64 bit PC. Problem solved.
PS. 32 bit is pretty much deprecated. That means in a few years it'll be "obsolete", and then "upsupported".
Although the amount it took 16 bit to phase out after 32 bit was introduced was quite long, so 32bit may be around for a while yet. (Even though there are very few 32 bit processors still being made).
RE: Should i get vista? by Nefzen on 07-16-2007 at 06:07 PM
will it work?
Like, don't you need a 64bit Windows for a 64bit computer?
and I also heard that certain programs needs tweaking or something for them to work on 64bit. Is this completely true or was something else meant here?
RE: Should i get vista? by andrewdodd13 on 07-16-2007 at 10:38 PM
Some programs don't work on 64 bit versions of Windows, that's a true fact.
However most 64-bit CPUs are currently backwards compatible with 32-bits. That's the main reason why the AMD Athlon 64 processors succeeded and the Intel Itanium was renamed the iTanic.
And stuff compiled for 64-bit CPUs will not run on 32-bit CPUs, thats fo sure.
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Verte on 07-17-2007 at 01:24 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Nefzen
Plus there's all that Creative Commons Right (or something like that). I hope to get past it, I've been told quite a lot of annoying things about it.
...whats this?
quote:
Originally posted by andrewdodd13
However most 64-bit CPUs are currently backwards compatible with 32-bits. That's the main reason why the AMD Athlon 64 processors succeeded and the Intel Itanium was renamed the iTanic.
Ooh yes. In fact, even 64 bit x86s think they are 16 bit when they start up, so you could even run QDOS on them if you like.
RE: Should i get vista? by _Humphreys on 07-21-2007 at 01:56 PM
NO.
It's a bunch of Microsoft crap that forces you to make your PC a whore to hollywood. Furthermore, it was built from the ground up meaning un-stability ahoy. Also...nothing works with it. My advice - stick with XP until the DX 10 exodus arrives.
Just think; what benefits will Vista give me over XP?
DX 10 = Direct X 10, it will be needed in the future for playing new games. This is not available for XP.
quote:
Originally posted by Nefzen
Like, don't you need a 64bit Windows for a 64bit computer?
and I also heard that certain programs needs tweaking or something for them to work on 64bit. Is this completely true or was something else meant here?
64 bit PCs can run 32 bit Operating Systems, I am currently running 32 bit XP on my 64 bit Athlon. 64 bit OSs such as Windows XP 64 are not compatiable with some software and hardware.
RE: Should i get vista? by -dt- on 07-21-2007 at 02:44 PM
quote:no it wasn't
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
Furthermore, it was built from the ground up meaning un-stability ahoy
, its based off server 2003. The first vista was going to be a rewrite then they changed it ages ago.and the only thing that makes vista unstable are the crappy drivers that venders are producing for it
RE: Should i get vista? by _Humphreys on 07-21-2007 at 02:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dt
no it wasn't , its based off server 2003. The first vista was going to be a rewrite then they changed it ages ago.
and the only thing that makes vista unstable are the crappy drivers that venders are producing for it
Well my sources are wrong...
Question, if it wasn't built from new how come it took them 6 years to make this OS?
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Phillip on 07-21-2007 at 02:57 PM
quote:Because Microsoft suck.
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
quote:
Originally posted by dt
no it wasn't , its based off server 2003. The first vista was going to be a rewrite then they changed it ages ago.
and the only thing that makes vista unstable are the crappy drivers that venders are producing for it
Well my sources are wrong...
Question, if it wasn't built from new how come it took them 6 years to make this OS?
RE: Should i get vista? by vaccination on 07-21-2007 at 03:50 PM
Times have changed, nearly everything works fine with Vista now. Stop living in the past. Once you start using it, you love it.
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by CookieRevised on 07-21-2007 at 05:30 PM
And in addition to dt's reply on Carltos Cool's post:
quote:errrmm... it is not available _yet_...
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
DX 10 = Direct X 10, it will be needed in the future for playing new games. This is not available for XP.
When they become available, put a DirectX 10 compatible graphics card in your PC and download the DirectX 10 driver and you're done
ps: its "DirectX", not "Direct X"
quote:Because:
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
Question, if it wasn't built from new how come it took them 6 years to make this OS?
1) Basing it on something does not mean you can simply copy/paste code.
2) Development doesn't just mean writing code. It also means doing research, study, making decisions, knowing what you're going to do in the first place, planning stuff, etc
3) every small aspect of the software needs to be tested in absolute detail in extremely many scenarios and with an extreme lot of 3rd party stuff.
---
To all the bashers: I suggest to read some developpers blogs once in a while to get an idea of what it takes to make a piece of big software. A lot of people have an extremely wrong idea about this and think everything comes by itself.
And it is certainly not only some department of Microsoft (again something which many people get totally wrong; Microsoft consists of a _lot_ of different independent departements) which doesn't get the deadline.
---
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Vista! It is a new OS... Remember all the (stupid crap) talk when XP came out? When XP SP2 came out? Deja-vu all the way I'd say....
RE: RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Phillip on 07-21-2007 at 05:57 PM
quote:DirectX10 Gaming will only be possible on Vista machines. There will always be hackers that try to port DX10 to XP but it will never work properly. Cookie isn't much of a gamer is he
Originally posted by CookieRevised
And in addition to dt's reply on Carltos Cool's post:
quote:errrmm... it is not available _yet_...
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
DX 10 = Direct X 10, it will be needed in the future for playing new games. This is not available for XP.
When they become available, put a DirectX 10 compatible graphics card in your PC and download the DirectX 10 driver and you're done
RE: RE: RE: Should i get vista? by andrewdodd13 on 07-21-2007 at 10:30 PM
quote:Don't get ahead of yourself Cookie, Vista SP1 isn't even out yet.
Originally posted by CookieRevised
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Vista! It is a new OS... Remember all the (stupid crap) talk when XP came out? When XP SP2 came out? Deja-vu all the way I'd say....
And yeah I'm sure Philip is right, DX10 apparently isn't coming out for XP, there's a few guys trying to backport it, but I tried Notepad from Vista on XP and it just died
. (The Windows 6 kernel has new API calls, etc, not implemented in the 5.x series... so... it probably won't work.)I'll try it again once SP1 is out, see if I likes it.
RE: RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Verte on 07-22-2007 at 04:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Vista! It is a new OS... Remember all the (stupid crap) talk when XP came out? When XP SP2 came out? Deja-vu all the way I'd say....
Yes, which is exactly why 2k remains a much nicer operating system than XP
RE: Should i get vista? by Nefzen on 07-22-2007 at 11:24 AM
at least it's not Windows Me
and what was wrong with SP2?
RE: Should i get vista? by CookieRevised on 07-22-2007 at 12:09 PM
quote:nothing, that's the point
Originally posted by Nefzen
and what was wrong with SP2?
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by _Humphreys on 07-23-2007 at 01:01 AM
quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
quote:nothing, that's the point
Originally posted by Nefzen
and what was wrong with SP2?
It still had many security issues, also the in-built firewall epicly fails.
RE: Should i get vista? by CookieRevised on 07-23-2007 at 02:44 AM
There is nothing wrong with SP2.
There is nothing wrong with Vista
If you want a total security, forget about using a PC all together.
RE: Should i get vista? by _Humphreys on 07-23-2007 at 03:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Cookie
If you want a total security, forget about using a PC all together.
You can come close with a Linux Distro...we all know why that is rofl.
Back on Topic --
I suggest not using Vista, however, everyone has their opinion. I just don't like the DRM dodgyness, addtionally I view it as a resource hog. I don't want my PC turning into to some talkie-toaster...
RE: Should i get vista? by Oxy on 07-23-2007 at 03:30 PM
If your computer can take vista smoothly, do it.
RE: Should i get vista? by CookieRevised on 07-24-2007 at 09:26 PM
quote:That's an option like so many other options which can be turned off.
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
I suggest not using Vista, however, everyone has their opinion. I just don't like the DRM dodgyness, addtionally I view it as a resource hog. I don't want my PC turning into to some talkie-toaster...
On that same manner, XP has similar options which slows it down.
So, no reason for not getting Vista....
RE: Should i get vista? by Kenji on 07-24-2007 at 09:51 PM
Ive never been affected by DRM, And I doubt I will be. Vista isn't a resource hog, btw.
RE: Should i get vista? by Nefzen on 07-24-2007 at 10:10 PM
you can turn off DRM?
doesn't it defeats the target?
and some options should automatically turn off when they are not needed...
like that "glass" thingy, you don't need it in full screen applications!
and if you try to undo an option in Windows, it takes YEARS
RE: RE: Should i get vista? by Verte on 07-25-2007 at 05:19 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Nefzen
you can turn off DRM?
doesn't it defeats the target?
That depends what you mean by turning it off
RE: Should i get vista? by John Anderton on 07-26-2007 at 12:11 PM
I've never been affected by DRM. I honestly don't see what the fuss is about atm. If you have discs, you take copies, they could be bounded by DRM. There should be ways to get around it.
Either way its your music so I don't see why you mind
On the other hand, if you *cough* download *cough* music I don't see what the problem is. It will work the same way it does on any other OS
Am I missing something here?
RE: Should i get vista? by Verte on 07-26-2007 at 02:10 PM
So, you guys don't have your HD content crippled for not having the right monitor?
RE: Should i get vista? by -dt- on 07-26-2007 at 03:44 PM
quote:nope
Originally posted by Verte
So, you guys don't have your HD content crippled for not having the right monitor?