Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dazmo

UAC rocks, why would you want to do that?

---

it asks you to agree/continue or cancel for every little thing

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dazmo
A lot faster than XP. And i havent had a crash or anything on here, where as XP would normally slow down after 2weeks of being up for me, I have had vista up on full load for 2 months before.

---

iv'e had 1 or 2 BSOD's i know iv'e had 1, but cant be sure bout 2, apart from that itss been fine,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashylay
For example most programs which we use alot dont work on Vista as everyone gets errors and if you have one pick up an Argos catalouge and go to the computer section. Look at stuff liek Printers, Scanner s etc.

---

Well that's not the fault of the operating system but that of the hardware/software manufacturer who doesn't make his product compatible with the OS

And plus, quite a few of those apps can be run successfully using the compatibility settings For those which cannot, wait for an update. Curse the developer if you have to. Vista has been made public for about 10 months now so I think I can say its about time the developers had a working copy of it. They would have worked on it since Beta 2. If nothing else, the official release was nearly 2 months back. That should be enough in most cases

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phillip
The only thing I hate about Vista is that the nVidia drivers are shit.

---

Download them via nvidia.com directly

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dazmo
UAC rocks, why would you want to do that?

---

For power users, its damn irritating having UAC bug you for trying to paste a file in a folder in C drive

I wish Microsoft had an option "Notify me once and remove the red icon" when you disable UAC That way, we wouldn't miss up on other notifications by Windows. Oh well

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
any hardware compatible with xp will be compatible with vista...

---

Nope thats wrong. Theres loads of things that dont work.

And yeah I know about it takes time for eveything to update but Ive seen loads of people sdaying Get vista its great and the slogan is:

"The wow starts now"

but should it be

"The wow starts in a couple of months?"

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton
For power users, its damn irritating having UAC bug you for trying to paste a file in a folder in C drive

---

It only takes about 1 second to click ok... Whats wrong with that? Yeah, it annoyed me at first but i got use to it.

Its worth keeping, as it stops anything dodgy running without you knowing..

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashylay

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
any hardware compatible with xp will be compatible with vista...

---

Nope thats wrong. Theres loads of things that dont work.

---

Read what he said again please..

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
any hardware compatible with xp will be compatible with vista...

---

WILL be compatible.. Got it?

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton
I wish Microsoft had an option "Notify me once and remove the red icon" when you disable UAC (Smilie) That way, we wouldn't miss up on other notifications by Windows. Oh well (Smilie)

---

Agreed, it should be possible to turn the notifications on and off individually, just like in XP.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dazmo
It only takes about 1 second to click ok... Whats wrong with that? Yeah, it annoyed me at first but i got use to it.

Its worth keeping, as it stops anything dodgy running without you knowing.. (Smilie)

---

It's a matter of opinion, actually...
>99% of all UAC nags are useless IMO, they only bother the user in an extremely obtrusive way, while vista is supposed to be "more productive". How can anyone be more productive if you have to confirm a random harmless action every other click?
Apart from that, most of the time it's a user action which allows malware to be installed. Just be careful with what you do on your pc and everything will be fine.
Edit: Dazmo, do you actually read every single UAC nag you get? Most people will in the beginning, but after a while they have seen enough of it and just want to continue what they were doing ASAP, thus clicking "ok (go ahead I don't care)", just like with many other dialogs. What's the use of the nags after people stop reading them?

Remember that Vista comes in many flavors.

Those who compare speeds should clearly state their 'flavor' (bussiness, home, basic, ultimate, etc) and clear state their specs.

Especially video drivers and video hardware as Vista makes extensive use and speed greatly depends on what video hardware you got. It also depends on what stuff you have enabled in Vista (eg Aero etc).

Also, startup and shutdown speeds greatly depend on how partionated your PC is and what you've got installed and running and even what kind of 'shut down' you use.

In a nutshell: don't compare speeds unlesss you include a decent and detailed benchmark chart.

As for UAC, for 'power' users it is indeed annoying, but don't forget that the security out-of-the-box in Vista is 1000 times better than in Windows XP, especially with such things as UAC.

Of course, Vista is a brand new OS. Of course there are still compatibility issues with some programs and of course there are going to be hotfixes and patches (heck even XP is still patched up every month)...

Don't forget that many hardware stuff is designed and produced years ago. It speaks for its own that not every (old) piece of hardware is going to be Vista-ready. And it is nearly impossible to expect that all manufactures are going to dish all their products and start developping new stuff especially for Vista. If so, expect new hardware products for Vista to be released in 5 years time (as it often takes that long to go from concept to retail). As for the other hardware, many stuff is already Vista-ready, even if it does not have a Vista-ready sticker on it.

tbh, there is nothing wrong with Vista, and if anything it is a big milestone for Microsoft and the computing industry as it finally breaks with many things which were carried along since the DOS age.

And since it is new, with a totally new GUI, many 'power' user will feel it is shit because they are not used to the interface and that counts for many complaints too.

As for those who complain that Vista uses a hell of a lot more memory: of course it is going to use more memory since the GUI is way more resource extensive. If you don't like that, I suggest to run Unix or DOS. This is the evolution in computing and since memory and processors get cheaper and more powerfull it is only logic that futur OS's will use that power. In fact, be glad that Vista uses your 2gb of memory instead of ignoring it. Otherwise what is the point in having 2gb if it isn't going to be used in the first place.

As for the question of needing it: I'd say no... There is actually no reason to buy Vista, unless you have games which only use DirectX10, unless you want to have some nifty GUI, unless you want to be secured as much as possible out-of-the-box.
XP is still good and almost all programs of today run on XP. In general, it is still too soon to buy Vista and thus the normal user doesn't have much reason to switch from XP to Vista. Unless he wants to be 'hip'.