[Orumph]

I have installed Vista SP1 RC and so far, the system runs smoother and a bit faster, file copy has been completely fixed. Among other things.

Get it here http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...DisplayLang=en

What I find the absolute most hilarious of all. Is these very same Lin-Nazis that are head over heels about XP said all the exact same things they are saying about Vista when XP was first released.
But now, "XP is so much better. If you are going to use Windoze use XP." <-- Hogwash

BTW, I do use linux, sparingly, but I do use it. And getting all things to work in Linux is not always an easy task.

Funny how one mention of not dis-liking windows sends them in a tizzy and they can't control themselves.

I have not had any major problems with vista that would make me stop using it.
I have a whole slew of old software that works perfectly as it did in XP and some from 9x days. I have only found one game so far that won't run in vista "Scarface" but that is it, and due to poor coding, not a vista problem. There is not one single solitary thing that I could do in XP, that I can not do in Vista, except play Scarface.

I have been running vista at work and home since RTM and have not had a single BSOD or had to reload it on either system. So, stability is one major reason to upgrade. The upgraded firewall and having Windows Defender (yes, it does work and improving) native in Vista is a plus. Vista's parental controls is a major added feature that should be (and we do) pushed and used by parents.

The UAC, although annoying, if used correctly, as was intended is a major reason to upgrade. It can save you from getting infected, but most people just don't care till they are infected then blame the OS, not themselves. UAC could be improved a whole lot, yes, true.
I would like to see an approved and disapproved list and be able to move/remove items back and forth.

My work pc is used to fix other PC's, so believe me when i say, if I couldn't do my job cause Vista is so horrible, I wouldn't be using it.

In almost every case that I have seen an OS related problem with XP or Vista, has been caused by the user, poor software or power problems at the home/office. Not because Vista or Xp just decided to flake out.

If you aren't running Vista on the right hardware (ie. fast, stable hardware) then you aren't running vista correctly and you are going to have problems. It was the same when XP first released.

If you use cheap crap hardware, you are eventually going to have problems anyway, no matter what OS you use.

Can XP do everything vista can? ...................... Yes.
Should you have to upgrade to Vista? ................. Maybe. Depends on weather or not you want to stay up to date with security and patches. If you don't care about that, then no, you do not need to upgrade. It is the same with Linux and Mac.

And with those other OS's, as I always say "Security through Obscurity."

[RobLinux]

There's nothing hilarious about having your motherboard destroyed because M$ decide to de-activate your system. I've been able to boot Vista now, but it has decided to make me validate my license and is refusing to boot again.

There is nothing wrong with the hardware I have, 4 GiB RAM is plenty even for Vista, and it is up to date, and has drivers provided by Dell, and the system is "designed for Vista". It is stable, and at first I agreed with you, but even if it is stable on your box, there are other problems with Vista. This is not a robust OS that will not let you down, when the going gets tough. I think you would also be annoyed in my position, the machine was unusable for 3 days. Similarly folk who buy media, tend not to be happy when Vista refuses to play it.

At first I made points similar to yours, but as predicted by Compiler, a couple of months on and the story is different.


On "Security through Obscurity" you appear to not know what that is. Security through Obscurity is, relying on hard to guess protocols and options for security, rather than algorithms and code that is avaialable for inspection by security experts. The problem with proprietary vendors, is that they tend to keep quiet and hide security problems, until a large number of customers suffer break-ins at which point their hand is forced.

This is the reason most Internet servers, run FOSS software. One example is BIND to provide DNS, used by the root servers. These, and many other servers are hardly "obscure".

You will also struggle to find any Linux forum users, afflicted by Viruses & Spy ware; there's plenty enough M$ fanboyz to try and infect Linux boxen, the fact is they have not succeeded in 15 years to spread such in Linux user community. Linux & BSD virus scanning is a specialist market, mostly applied to scan Emails and Files before they are accessed by Windows machines.
Virus infections have been restricted to emulators that run Windows.

[steppenwolf]

im only on 512 megs ram on laptop vista and it seems to work

so i see no issue much

sometimes the screen wont stay still once a week or so

[simpswr]

A Microsoft update destroyed your motherboard?????

[RootbeaR]

Originally Posted by simpswr

A Microsoft update destroyed your motherboard?????

I missed where someone said that?
Which post?

[simpswr]

Post # 167

[Compiler]

Well... looks like we may have a wrapper to allow DX10 to run on.... Windows XP.

http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/

[RobLinux]

Originally Posted by RootbeaR

I missed where someone said that?
Which post?

It happened to me see post http://forums.techguy.org/5411629-post159.html shortly after I publically recanted http://forums.techguy.org/5408142-post155.html

Perhaps there's a curse of Vista which strikes those who recant publically?

[RobLinux]

Originally Posted by Compiler

Well... looks like we may have a wrapper to allow DX10 to run on.... Windows XP.

So where's the thread going to be about DX10 being slow, bloatware that's useless compared to DX9?

[swepres]

O.K. guys. I just don't like the "even for a 70 year old woman" bit. I am 79 and running Vista with no problems that a little research couldn't fix. Not all of us old female codgers are "average" users! Why don't you bury this thread.

[Compiler]

Originally Posted by RobLinux

So where's the thread going to be about DX10 being slow, bloatware that's useless compared to DX9?

Oh come on... DX10 is the only worth while "feature" in vista, which is artifically a "vista" only compatible tool. DX10 is something that us gamers WANT... but it'll still be a few years before there are games that really use all the features of DX10. Crysis uses it quite abit... but it kills systems.

That *IS* the odd thing about DX10 thou, its supposed to be much more efficent in 3D functions since they made it "smarter" (so they say) and removed functions that were no longer used from the old days.

So far, some DX10 games look none to noticablly better over Dx9 mode... most just have slight improvements.

[balthasar]

Originally Posted by Compiler

I downloaded 5 drivers (mobo/graphics/networking/Audio) as some from ECS (maker of the mobo – which had a model very similar) in case he screwed up – because he did.

when i saw ECS i was no wonder. ECS is the worst motherboard maker in the world. my other system runs Vista great and its not ECS.

my other system has a ECS board and its nothing but problems

i dought its Vista its that crappy board

[davehc]

Originally Posted by swepres

O.K. guys. I just don't like the "even for a 70 year old woman" bit. I am 79 and running Vista with no problems that a little research couldn't fix. Not all of us old female codgers are "average" users! Why don't you bury this thread.

lol
I have remarked on it before. But the thread has become entertaining and, sometimes, educational. Perhaps rather than close it it should have a forum of its own called, say, "Who really hates Vista", or similar.
The moderators could then move all anti Vista posters from the help to that forum.
P.S. I'm 74

[Compiler]

While ECS is one of the lowest of the boards, there are WORSE.... such as PC-CHIPS. Ah - I remember their 486sx boards with FAKE cache RAM chips. In the OLD days, cache was NOT on the CPU - but 8~16k on the motherboard. The BIOS said there was cache.. but there wasn't.

Anyways - ECS products vary from pure crap to usable. Their quality did meet up enough f or a company like HP to sell. Sure, it was a cheap computer - but HP can't afford a high return rate on low-end computers. I'll admit *I* am using an ECS board which I got for free, but I wouldn't ever buy one for myself or a client or friend. Its been running for over a year without problems. And we're still back to the simple fact that XP ran just fine on the same hardware.

[RobLinux]

Originally Posted by Compiler

Oh come on... DX10 is the only worth while "feature" in vista, which is artifically a "vista" only compatible tool. DX10 is something that us gamers WANT... but it'll still be a few years before there are games that really use all the features of DX10. Crysis uses it quite abit... but it kills systems.

That *IS* the odd thing about DX10 thou, its supposed to be much more efficent in 3D functions since they made it "smarter" (so they say) and removed functions that were no longer used from the old days.

So far, some DX10 games look none to noticablly better over Dx9 mode... most just have slight improvements.

So DX10 is similar to Vista overall. Some new features (and DX10 isn't one that interests me, you ignore the other ones); but a poor implementation that badly need DX10.1 to may be be actually useful.

As you say, using DX10 "kills systems". There's been some info about, how some of those "DX10" only games, were rather simply end-user config tweakable to run on XP and DX9 no problem. It was marketing BS that stressed the DX10 angle, think it was on inquirer site or such, may even be the crysis games you mention.

All DX10 is about, is a higher level of eye candy, and for most ppl probably the only reason they'll prefer Vista is the look of Aero, making XP look very dated.