Shoutbox

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.

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.

---

Happens with pretty much every other windows version...

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:

---

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.

---

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voldemort
Happens with pretty much every other windows version...

---

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
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:

---

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 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.
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

quote:

---

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

---

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.

quote:

---

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

---

It's not a "new OS".  The OS is "Windows" and Vista is just another incremental release.

quote:

---

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.

---

Your joking right..? Are you saying Microsoft should make sure all programs work fine on their OS..?

quote:

---

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.

---

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.

Basically if you know what your doing, download a copy and try it out for the 30 days. Judge it for yourself.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Verte
Eh, blame the other vendors.. No.

---

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).

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:

---

Originally posted by Adeptus
It's not a "new OS".  The OS is "Windows" and Vista is just another incremental release.

---

Point taken. But you know what I meant

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

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.

---

quote:

---

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.

---

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.

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:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
runs in XP too (and for the time being sometimes better).

---

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.
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

quote:

---

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.

---

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...

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...