Make The Most Of Windows Vista

[Guest Reimar]

"What is so difficult to understand?"

>>>>That's a bit rich coming from you Reimar, having started several threads on Vista before, and receiving many responses from many many dissastisfied Vista user's which you've then chosen to ignore or attempted (unsuccessfully) to find reasons to invalidate their thinking !

"And Vista isn't crap! It's a well working Operating System with a lot advantages. If you're unable to work with it, it's your problem and not MS! I work with Vista since Beta 1 without any problems."

>>>>Why are you so defensive of Vista ? The perception of a lot of Vista user's is not good (putting it kindly) and many (like myself) have official vendor system's 'out of the box' that perform poorly and constantly hang. That's is unhappily my and many others problem, and sure, MS won't give a dam_n but it won't make me and many others a Vista fan.

As a matter of interest, do you tell your customers "If you're unable to work with it it's your problem" re Vista ?

Need I to write my comments in bold letters so I want everyone take a look at it?

It would be a kind poor thinking, not to tell a picture of an poor character if I do so!

Your experiences, if you have some, will differs from my and for me it's important how something work for me and my customers systems. And I really don't mind what others think about that!

And whats about the perception of other Vista Users, which may not able or even not willing to test out an system, I don't mind either!

And I like to ignore that answers which are based on something like Wikipedia or other printed news but NOT own experiences because I'll never go in an competition with that!

Cheers.

[b19bry]

"What is so difficult to understand?"

>>>>That's a bit rich coming from you Reimar, having started several threads on Vista before, and receiving many responses from many many dissastisfied Vista user's which you've then chosen to ignore or attempted (unsuccessfully) to find reasons to invalidate their thinking !

"And Vista isn't crap! It's a well working Operating System with a lot advantages. If you're unable to work with it, it's your problem and not MS! I work with Vista since Beta 1 without any problems."

>>>>Why are you so defensive of Vista ? The perception of a lot of Vista user's is not good (putting it kindly) and many (like myself) have official vendor system's 'out of the box' that perform poorly and constantly hang. That's is unhappily my and many others problem, and sure, MS won't give a dam_n but it won't make me and many others a Vista fan.

As a matter of interest, do you tell your customers "If you're unable to work with it it's your problem" re Vista ?

Need I to write my comments in bold letters so I want everyone take a look at it?

It would be a kind poor thinking, not to tell a picture of an poor character if I do so!

Your experiences, if you have some, will differs from my and for me it's important how something work for me and my customers systems. And I really don't mind what others think about that!

And whats about the perception of other Vista Users, which may not able or even not willing to test out an system, I don't mind either!

And I like to ignore that answers which are based on something like Wikipedia or other printed news but NOT own experiences because I'll never go in an competition with that!

Cheers.

"And whats about the perception of other Vista Users, which may not able or even not willing to test out an system, I don't mind either!"

>>>>I'm talking about those who use the system (like myself and many others) on a daily basis and are unhappy with it.

"And I like to ignore that answers which are based on something like Wikipedia or other printed news but NOT own experiences because I'll never go in an competition with that!"

>>>>There you go again........ ignoring opinions based on real experiences of Vista that don't conform to your ideal, and going off on some nonsensical tangent about Wikipedia !

FYI I used bold to distinguish my comments from your quotes but since that upsets you I merely indent my comments this time !

[Guest Reimar]

'basically build (sic) from the ground up' was the original grammatically incorrect statement, and as noted was and is in error. Further, the almost hysterical comment that a entirely new OS could not support programs and platforms is just naive and foolish, with or without exclamation points, though does point to a lack of understanding as to how an OS/HAL/Chip Set interrogative system functions. But there again assembler is not a language many understand these days.

Regards

PS Re the above [support to 2014] there is a thread on this running already.

Hysterical? And just naive and foolish?

Did you realize that the major problems with Vista was because of NON Support from third party manufacturer for not to produce the needed Drivers, Software upgrades for their programs and so on. And that until today!

That the most is working today is because of Microsoft and not the third Parties in most of the cases.

And if you wrote: ""'basically build (sic) from the ground up' was the original grammatically incorrect statement"" for an OS which is based on an existing well working OS (XP), whats about an really new OS build from the ground up? Less problems?

Cheers.

[Guest Reimar]

"And whats about the perception of other Vista Users, which may not able or even not willing to test out an system, I don't mind either!"

>>>>I'm talking about those who use the system (like myself and many others) on a daily basis and are unhappy with it.

"And I like to ignore that answers which are based on something like Wikipedia or other printed news but NOT own experiences because I'll never go in an competition with that!"

>>>>There you go again........ ignoring opinions based on real experiences of Vista that don't conform to your ideal, and going off on some nonsensical tangent about Wikipedia !

FYI I used bold to distinguish my comments from your quotes but since that upsets you I merely indent my comments this time !

I write it now here again: The most important experiences are my own, and if also the of my customers but NOT from someone else! And I didn't have any Idol and what I wrote about Wikipeda was just because that was come up in the past several time as "evidence"!

If you've bad experiences, I'm sorry for that, but it wouldn't change my mind because of my experiences which are good. And if you can't accept that others having good experiences with something you don't have or you don't like, it's your own problem and you have to see that as that!

If my experiences are good, why I should tell a different story? And what others write can or can not be true, but that's based on many different factors which isn't comparable.

And I'll continue to ignore that comments which not accepting that I can have others and maybe better experiences as them. I'll also ignore comments from that humans who having nothing to do as to be anti against everything.

Cheers.

[RJJ]

I will never understand why Microsoft sacrifies the best and most stable OS they ever developed for this crap called Vista.

Doesn't Microsoft realize nobody want Vista? Is this a new attempt to force customers to buy their Vista?

It's well known that companies will not switch to Vista but continue with XP.

Remember when Windows 95 was released and nobody was game to upgrade Windows 3.1 because of all the problems with Windows 95?

Then they released Windows 95B - It was great and stable, why would anyone consider upgrading to Windows 98...

Windows 98 SE (Second Edition) came along and is still considered by some to be the best Microsoft ever released.

Let's not go down the path of Windows ME because that was abandoned well before they could get the Service Pack released.

Instead the focus was shifted to the Windows NT architecture which was currently called Windows 2000.

It used to be said "You can't run serious games on Windows 2000, it's a business machine OS"

Lots of issues when that was released, but eventually settled down. Why would anyone upgrade to Windows XP???

"So many problems", "This will be the end of Microsoft", etc.

Windows SP1 made things better and most people moved from Windows 2000.

Windows SP2 came along so we could have greater security (only as far as XP architecture would allow) and the ability to access >186GB disks.

Windows Vista has been around for 2 years and everyone is bagging it. Why would you move off Windows XP SP2?

"4GB of Ram is beyond the reach of Windows XP architecture" is a good start (unless you specifically hunted Windows XP 64 bit).

Windows Vista SP1 is here and I am now going to start the investigation of benefits (seeing all my 4GB of RAM is one) of Vista which is supported by most hardware manufacturers now.

What's the bet, in two years people will be saying "You must be joking... Why move from Vista SP1 (or SP2 by then) to Windows 7?"

The world progresses and the end user needs to try and keep up... well at least when the service packs are released.

Edited July 6, 2008 by RJJ

[b19bry]

"And whats about the perception of other Vista Users, which may not able or even not willing to test out an system, I don't mind either!"

>>>>I'm talking about those who use the system (like myself and many others) on a daily basis and are unhappy with it.

"And I like to ignore that answers which are based on something like Wikipedia or other printed news but NOT own experiences because I'll never go in an competition with that!"

>>>>There you go again........ ignoring opinions based on real experiences of Vista that don't conform to your ideal, and going off on some nonsensical tangent about Wikipedia !

FYI I used bold to distinguish my comments from your quotes but since that upsets you I merely indent my comments this time !

I write it now here again: The most important experiences are my own, and if also the of my customers but NOT from someone else!

>>>If that's the case why do you bother to post on a public forum where, by definition, you can expect experiences outside of this exclusive environment ? Surely, you'd be better off posting your MS and self promoting rubbish in a private forum ?

And I didn't have any Idol and what I wrote about Wikipeda was just because that was come up in the past several time as "evidence"!

>>> I wasn't accusing you of having an Idol however that may be more fitting (do you understand the difference between Idol and Ideal ?), I was also not aware of the previous Wikipedia references.

If you've bad experiences, I'm sorry for that, but it wouldn't change my mind because of my experiences which are good. And if you can't accept that others having good experiences with something you don't have or you don't like, it's your own problem and you have to see that as that!

>>> I'm not asking you to be sorry or change your mind, but merely accept that not all users experiences of Vista are as glowingly enthusiastic as yours and to stop being so arrogant and dismissive of other's views, since it is you that started the thread. At the same time I do accept that there are people (such as yourself) that think more positively about Vista.

If my experiences are good, why I should tell a different story? And what others write can or can not be true, but that's based on many different factors which isn't comparable.

And I'll continue to ignore that comments which not accepting that I can have others and maybe better experiences as them. I'll also ignore comments from that

"humans who having nothing to do as to be anti against everything."

>>>Pretty profound comment that huh ?

Cheers.

[Guest Reimar]

b19bry:

May you haven't realized that I posted not my own meaning in the OP but an article NOT written by me?!

But that didn't mean that I go completely conform with that article?

I do accept the experiences others as longs as that their own, while in many cases that isn't!

And do NOT accept that someone like to tell my that my experiences not ok if they are!

I'm unable to tell something about the experiences others, if I haven't witness in person that event and so others can't do that as well. A printed info in some Book or published on some Website is just theory as long as you haven't witness that event.

I'm not glorify Vista because it isn't perfect! But from my experiences and a lot of my customers and friends Vista is better and more secure than XP. There also a few customers and friends who having problems with Vista, I would never deny that.

But here comes the question why. And if you start to digg deeper you'll find out that in most of that cases you easily can group that user in a few catogories:

1. Users with older Hardware which can't be upgarded;

2. Users with older Software and/or Hardware without support for Vista or the newer NT System;

3. Users limited computer knowledge;

4. Users which "playing" with software, downloading Torrents (pirated software) and so on.

May some few more different users but this 4 are the main groups.

And there is one more group: those Users which are using pirated software, special the more expensive one and the OS's! And that's exactly those user which having the most problems, the one which using prirated OS's! Doesn't matter its MS or Mac OS's both of them having protection on them system and if you just do some test while comparing an original Vista DVD with and, let say Pantip Copy Vista, you'll easily find out that those two differs in Size, Content and so on!

Arogant? I'm not but just tell what I'm thinking, like it or not!

Cheers.

[dotcom]

I'm starting to see why Gates is one of the most hated persons in the world.

I don't need to buy the godamn software - costing about 2 months wages for most Thai's.

I would lease it - if they promised I would always have the latest version.

btw - if VISTA is so good why is Norton & McAfee still in business? I'll bet you because it has just as many security flaws as it's predecessors.

It's a little too hip hop for my liking.

VISTA is a huge embarassment for MS. Hopefully they are building a system that will delight users as much as XP Pro SP3. I'm with meadish on this one. VISTA sucks. Not Needed.

[b19bry]

b19bry:

May you haven't realized that I posted not my own meaning in the OP but an article NOT written by me?!

>>>I well realise, however the implication from you posting the article is that we should all move on and be happy with Vista or did I get that wrong ?

But that didn't mean that I go completely conform with that article?

>>>Best not to !

I do accept the experiences others as longs as that their own, while in many cases that isn't!

>>>Again........ I'm giving my personal experiences and so have many others in reply to your posts.

And do NOT accept that someone like to tell my that my experiences not ok if they are!

>>>Nobody is doing that, certainly not me ?

I'm unable to tell something about the experiences others, if I haven't witness in person that event and so others can't do that as well. A printed info in some Book or published on some Website is just theory as long as you haven't witness that event.

I'm not glorify Vista because it isn't perfect! But from my experiences and a lot of my customers and friends Vista is better and more secure than XP. There also a few customers and friends who having problems with Vista, I would never deny that.

>>>Eureka........... I think we're getting somewhere.

But here comes the question why. And if you start to digg deeper you'll find out that in most of that cases you easily can group that user in a few catogories:

1. Users with older Hardware which can't be upgarded;

>>>I have a new laptop with Vista installed, which may be upgraded at extra cost.

2. Users with older Software and/or Hardware without support for Vista or the newer NT System;

>>>Same as point 1 above, I have a number of friends in the same boat as myself.

3. Users limited computer knowledge;

>>>I'm an ex programmer currently work in IT and have in depth knowledge of many of the popular O/S over the last 25 years.

4. Users which "playing" with software, downloading Torrents (pirated software) and so on.

>>>Not me

May some few more different users but this 4 are the main groups.

>>>As explained above I think you're dead wrong

And there is one more group: those Users which are using pirated software, special the more expensive one and the OS's! And that's exactly those user which having the most problems, the one which using prirated OS's! Doesn't matter its MS or Mac OS's both of them having protection on them system and if you just do some test while comparing an original Vista DVD with and, let say Pantip Copy Vista, you'll easily find out that those two differs in Size, Content and so on!

>>>Again not applicable, however as seen before you're usual tactic to deflect criticism away from Vista.

Arogant? I'm not but just tell what I'm thinking, like it or not!

>>>Arrogant, yes and and as shown by your comments above, dismissive of other's posts

Cheers.

[Steve2UK]

Reimar, just what is it with you and your use of " ! " all the time? You might make some reasonable points in your posts but you really undermine your own argument when you end so many sentences with it. It just makes you look like you're angry and it's bad manners - particularly surprising from a moderator.

Edited July 6, 2008 by Steve2UK

[sjaak327]

I'm starting to see why Gates is one of the most hated persons in the world.

I don't need to buy the godamn software - costing about 2 months wages for most Thai's.

I would lease it - if they promised I would always have the latest version.

btw - if VISTA is so good why is Norton & McAfee still in business? I'll bet you because it has just as many security flaws as it's predecessors.

It's a little too hip hop for my liking.

VISTA is a huge embarassment for MS. Hopefully they are building a system that will delight users as much as XP Pro SP3. I'm with meadish on this one. VISTA sucks. Not Needed.

Of course it is not needed, who says it is. If you want to run XP, ubuntu, Suse, OSX, go right ahead, but I disagree that Vista would be an embarresment for MS, it simply isn't, and I bet that the money they make out of it, would also not qualify for such a label.

But then again I don't like hip hop either

Can you actually tell me what enhancements were brought into XP SP3 as compared to SP2 ? Home users wouldn't know the difference, Corporate users get NAP support, which of course was built into Vista from day one.

But some other goodies, like SSTP support were unfortunately not included into XP SP3, another clear sign, that active development of XP has stopped, and Microsoft has moved to Vista and Vienna starting January 2010.

Two things can happen, either Microsoft will loose a big part of their marketshare, if Vista really sucks, or everyone will either upgrade to Vista or will wait for Vienna, which will be largely based upon Vista.

By the way, I bet you never actually ran vista, I mean, I have been running Vista for a long time, and I'm very sorry, but compared to XP, vista rocks, ,maybe it's not the giant leap forward (I'm referring to a traveller's post) but IMHO, it is much better and more slick then XP.

Of course nobody knows at this point which direction Windows 7 will take, some argue that Microsoft will do the same as Apple did when they skipped backwards compatiblity in OSX as compared to OS9 (Alltough I think that will be highly unlikely), or Vienna will be Vista part two with added features. I think however it is save to say, that it will not be XP re-revisisted.

Edited July 6, 2008 by sjaak327

[Veazer]

[quote name='b19bry' post='2071925'

"And I like to ignore that answers which are based on something like Wikipedia or other printed news but NOT own experiences because I'll never go in an competition with that!"

>>>>There you go again........ ignoring opinions based on real experiences of Vista that don't conform to your ideal, and going off on some nonsensical tangent about Wikipedia !

The wikipedia reference is Reimar's attempt to take a jab at me. Why he posted it here is beyond me.

In a recent thread, I stated that I felt Windows ME was worse OS than its predecessor Windows 98 SE. Reimar said I was just being negative so I quoted the articles of Windows ME and 98 SE from wiki. Both were backing up my statements and evidently he didn't like that. Bear in mind that the articles are not just opinion pieces from a handful of users, but a seemingly well researched article that included information from Microsoft itself and industry magazines like PC World.

Reimar, I find it interesting that you only seem to value 'people's own experiences' and yet at the same time you dismiss articles and other sources of information that are a collection of many users experiences. For example, the PC World article cited in Wiki rated WinME as the number 4 worst tech product of all time, the only operating system to make the list. Don't you think the decision to rank it as such was based on letters and emails of user's experiences with the product, as well as the experience of the PC World staff? These rankings don't come out of thin air, they are based on exactly the thing you claim to be the most important - individual user experience.

I'm going to guess that you do have some respect for PC World's opinion, since that is where you cut and pasted the first post from this thread.

[Guest Reimar]

The wikipedia reference is Reimar's attempt to take a jab at me. Why he posted it here is beyond me.

In a recent thread, I stated that I felt Windows ME was worse OS than its predecessor Windows 98 SE. Reimar said I was just being negative so I quoted the articles of Windows ME and 98 SE from wiki. Both were backing up my statements and evidently he didn't like that. Bear in mind that the articles are not just opinion pieces from a handful of users, but a seemingly well researched article that included information from Microsoft itself and industry magazines like PC World.

Reimar, I find it interesting that you only seem to value 'people's own experiences' and yet at the same time you dismiss articles and other sources of information that are a collection of many users experiences. For example, the PC World article cited in Wiki rated WinME as the number 4 worst tech product of all time, the only operating system to make the list. Don't you think the decision to rank it as such was based on letters and emails of user's experiences with the product, as well as the experience of the PC World staff? These rankings don't come out of thin air, they are based on exactly the thing you claim to be the most important - individual user experience.

I'm going to guess that you do have some respect for PC World's opinion, since that is where you cut and pasted the first post from this thread.

Veazer, I think you misundertsood me!

That I was mention just Wikipedia by name was not because of the post from you. There were in the past same answers which mentioned different sources, which even was including Wikipedia.

It is not that I dismiss the experiences from others but if others just don't posting the results of their own experiences and pointing with their answers to 3. party sources only.

Everything has at minimum 2 sites and that applies for Operating Systems as well. And if a lot humans just pointing to the bad site because everybody does, that just shows how negative they are thinking without to give the other site a try.

I can bring you a lot Users of Vista which will tell to about their positive experiences of Vista much more than XP!

But if you take the time and check at the TV Forum how many bother about the bad sites of Vista and the only good OS XP, and than check how many of them really having using Vista, not just take a sniff for a few days, you'll easily find out the differences. It would be interesting for yopu I do believe!

I never was talking bad about XP and with Vista I've bery good experiences, much better than with XP before, So why I should take over the result of experienes others, if there really were some, if my own are just positive only?

OK, that someone will have some problems, is sure and I would never deny that. But you have to ask why that is so?!

Here in Thailand it's easy to get all software as a copy! And what you can't find at Pantip, you can download from the Torrents! All this software are modified in some or more ways but not more the originals.

And the real differences you'll find out while running that software. And believe it or not, I don't mind about that, but the problems some of my friends and customers was having with Vista, were with Pantip Copies and the use of OEM from Manufacturer like HP, Acer pp. on other than the original computers!

I use originals only and haven't any problems so far, exept some drivers which wasn't made by MS but by Lexmark!

According to that article in PC-World, I don't have some respect but was thinking that the infos my interesting for someone else! Not for everybody, that's for sure!

And just to make it once more clear, there was nothing against you and not againsta beverybody else, as long as they not going against me here in public. I do respect other humans and I think I've the same right that they respect me.

Cheers.

[Veazer]

The wikipedia reference is Reimar's attempt to take a jab at me. Why he posted it here is beyond me.

In a recent thread, I stated that I felt Windows ME was worse OS than its predecessor Windows 98 SE. Reimar said I was just being negative so I quoted the articles of Windows ME and 98 SE from wiki. Both were backing up my statements and evidently he didn't like that. Bear in mind that the articles are not just opinion pieces from a handful of users, but a seemingly well researched article that included information from Microsoft itself and industry magazines like PC World.

Reimar, I find it interesting that you only seem to value 'people's own experiences' and yet at the same time you dismiss articles and other sources of information that are a collection of many users experiences. For example, the PC World article cited in Wiki rated WinME as the number 4 worst tech product of all time, the only operating system to make the list. Don't you think the decision to rank it as such was based on letters and emails of user's experiences with the product, as well as the experience of the PC World staff? These rankings don't come out of thin air, they are based on exactly the thing you claim to be the most important - individual user experience.

I'm going to guess that you do have some respect for PC World's opinion, since that is where you cut and pasted the first post from this thread.

Veazer, I think you misundertsood me!

That I was mention just Wikipedia by name was not because of the post from you. There were in the past same answers which mentioned different sources, which even was including Wikipedia.

Not because of the post from me? You specifically complained about people using Wikipedia as an information source, twice, on the same day that I did so. If you were referring to someone other than me, then please show me a link.

It is not that I dismiss the experiences from others but if others just don't posting the results of their own experiences and pointing with their answers to 3. party sources only.

Everything has at minimum 2 sites and that applies for Operating Systems as well. And if a lot humans just pointing to the bad site because everybody does, that just shows how negative they are thinking without to give the other site a try.

I started by posting my own experiences, exactly as you did, and you just told me i was being negative. I said it was a headache for me, you reported that it worked better for you. Two people reporting their first hand experience with it, yes? But because my opinion was not the same as yours, you felt compelled to tell me that I had a bad attitude rather than just accepting that my experience with the product differed from yours.

I can bring you a lot Users of Vista which will tell to about their positive experiences of Vista much more than XP!

But if you take the time and check at the TV Forum how many bother about the bad sites of Vista and the only good OS XP, and than check how many of them really having using Vista, not just take a sniff for a few days, you'll easily find out the differences. It would be interesting for yopu I do believe!

I never was talking bad about XP and with Vista I've bery good experiences, much better than with XP before, So why I should take over the result of experienes others, if there really were some, if my own are just positive only?

OK, that someone will have some problems, is sure and I would never deny that. But you have to ask why that is so?!

Here in Thailand it's easy to get all software as a copy! And what you can't find at Pantip, you can download from the Torrents! All this software are modified in some or more ways but not more the originals.

And the real differences you'll find out while running that software. And believe it or not, I don't mind about that, but the problems some of my friends and customers was having with Vista, were with Pantip Copies and the use of OEM from Manufacturer like HP, Acer pp. on other than the original computers!

I use originals only and haven't any problems so far, exept some drivers which wasn't made by MS but by Lexmark!

According to that article in PC-World, I don't have some respect but was thinking that the infos my interesting for someone else! Not for everybody, that's for sure!

And just to make it once more clear, there was nothing against you and not againsta beverybody else, as long as they not going against me here in public. I do respect other humans and I think I've the same right that they respect me.

Cheers.

Of course you could bring a lot of users to say they prefer Vista over XP, just as you could bring a lot of users that preferred XP over Vista. In both cases, you would be inaccurately portraying the opinion of the user base as a whole because you simply brought users of the opinion you wished to express. This is why I chose to cite a source that I felt would be as neutral as possible.

I don't have any experience with pirated versions of Vista, just OEM installs on some laptops in local offices that I support. My experience with Vista is admittedly limited, but in every case I have come away feeling disappointed. It wasn't driver issues or piracy, just that the OS felt sluggish and less responsive than I expected from new machines with decent specs. Even after i thinned out all the unnecessary startup apps and what not, it just felt like an old machine that was in bad need of an OS re-install.

There are ancient problems with windows that I hoped to see taken care of with Vista, like unreadable CDs causing a machine to lock up while it continuously tried to read the disc, but the problems are still there. I also have more networking issues on the Vista machines than the XP machines as well. One day is printer is available on the network, next day it's gone. I don't have some goal to make any OS look bad whether it's WinME, Vista or anythings else. I just use it and report what I find. I really wanted to like vista, i am admittedly a sucker for eye candy and I liked the idea of Aero and and a hardware accelerated shell that could compete with OSX. After using Vista and seeing benchmark after benchmark confirming the performance issues, i think I'll just stick with XP and hope that Cairo is available soon and works as well as promised.

Besides, you yourself have mentioned problems with Vista in the past completely unrelated to third party drivers, piracy, etc. Do you recall your benchmarks comparing Vista performance against WInXP & Win2K3 (which isn't even marketed as a workstation OS)? Your vista benchmarks for excel spreadsheet number crunching took 5 minutes +, while Win2K3 managed the same task in just 2 min 10 seconds. To me, that screams that the OS has a some major issues. If an OS has only ~40% of the performance of the previous OS in a CPU heavy task like this, imho something is majorly wrong.

You yourself stated, in the same thread:

"As I've to deal with both OS I need to run them and frankly, i\Vista runs well for me. But to get it that stage was a quite long journey and I've to tweak Vista down to the bottom. What I've done will be impossible for the most of the users for many reasons. It isn't easy at all!

Pesonally I would suggest Vista to Users with a lot experiences only. All others should stick with XP.

XP is a great system and very stable as well. In the real, there isn't any really need for change special if everything works fine."

[slackula]

I think Reimar's spell checker has committed suicide, or Vista doesn't have a driver for his keyboard

[dotcom]

I want a computer to be just as complictaed to use as a toaster or a TV set.

He tweaked it from the bottom to the top. Some of us just don't want to spend the time to get microkrap software to work.

XP is built on the kernel of Win2K - a massive step up from WIN98 & all it's variants.

Microkrap should set it's sights on delighting customers (with the sucessor to VISTA) like XP Pro did.

Previous to that OS computers were a massive PITA.

[Guest Reimar]

Of course you could bring a lot of users to say they prefer Vista over XP, just as you could bring a lot of users that preferred XP over Vista. In both cases, you would be inaccurately portraying the opinion of the user base as a whole because you simply brought users of the opinion you wished to express. This is why I chose to cite a source that I felt would be as neutral as possible.

I don't have any experience with pirated versions of Vista, just OEM installs on some laptops in local offices that I support. My experience with Vista is admittedly limited, but in every case I have come away feeling disappointed. It wasn't driver issues or piracy, just that the OS felt sluggish and less responsive than I expected from new machines with decent specs. Even after i thinned out all the unnecessary startup apps and what not, it just felt like an old machine that was in bad need of an OS re-install.

One think I've learned in the past time with Vista, and even XP before, is that the OEM Versions which coming with the Computer from the Manufacturer, are modified in many aspects. This also prevents the use of that specific version on an other branded computer or with limited functionality.

If I think about how my Acer Laptop was working with the original Acer Vista Version on beginning, it was just a joke.

There are ancient problems with windows that I hoped to see taken care of with Vista, like unreadable CDs causing a machine to lock up while it continuously tried to read the disc, but the problems are still there. I also have more networking issues on the Vista machines than the XP machines as well. One day is printer is available on the network, next day it's gone. I don't have some goal to make any OS look bad whether it's WinME, Vista or anythings else. I just use it and report what I find. I really wanted to like vista, i am admittedly a sucker for eye candy and I liked the idea of Aero and and a hardware accelerated shell that could compete with OSX. After using Vista and seeing benchmark after benchmark confirming the performance issues, i think I'll just stick with XP and hope that Cairo is available soon and works as well as promised.

In the meantime Vista works very well on all computer, include the Acer Laptop! How? You would ask!

As I had problems with to get Vista to boot up in an reasnoble time, get some programs to run smoothly, get all attached equipment to work, Vista still was working well. Never get an BSOD or some hanging or something like that. Just Vista was run to slow.

I started to use the different Versions of Vista, no differences. Changed Hardware, finally no real differences. I was near to give up.

I talked with an Classmate who's is working in Redmond in the Dev-Center.

Finally after SP1 came out, I started to re-install, using a clean install of all my computers running Vista. First used to install Vista, installed all required Drivers and after that the software. To last I installed SP1 and the rest of available updates. Result: NOTHING!

Started again: Clean install, after that install SP1 and run a online update for the rest of tha available Updates. Installed the software. Result: an unbelievable improvment! Very fast, everything runs much faster and much more smooth. An Excel Worksheet from 100 MB to filter which was need before 45 min was done in 15 min now.

So I installed Vista complete new on my Laptop, but not the Acer Version, the original instead. Startup before 5 min after 45 sec!

And all of the testing was done without to tweak Vista for more power!

Besides, you yourself have mentioned problems with Vista in the past completely unrelated to third party drivers, piracy, etc. Do you recall your benchmarks comparing Vista performance against WInXP & Win2K3 (which isn't even marketed as a workstation OS)? Your vista benchmarks for excel spreadsheet number crunching took 5 minutes +, while Win2K3 managed the same task in just 2 min 10 seconds. To me, that screams that the OS has a some major issues. If an OS has only ~40% of the performance of the previous OS in a CPU heavy task like this, imho something is majorly wrong.

After I done the reinstall as described above, all that problems was gone. I also installed Vista and Server 2008 both as 64 Bit on the same computer (AMD AM2 X2 5000, 8 GB, 3 x 320 GB SATA 2, 8500 GT Extreme) each on one HDD using the F12 Key (Gigabyte MB) for to choose the Boot HD and tested the speed there, once with 4 GB memory and than with 8 GB Memory. The difference was: with 4 GB: Server 2008 20% faster than Vista and with 8 GB: Vista 20% faster than Server 2008!

Just a few days ago I tested Server 2008 on the same computer as Server 2008 but unfortunatly there wasn't an real improvement, just a bout 10% in speed and that was not enough for to change, compare the old Computer and I had move the HDD back.

One big advantage of vista is on Dual Core and X2 Computer compare to XP: the utilization of both CPU's.

But I installed Vista just a short time ago on an Sony Laptop Computer (3 years old, an intel 1.73 Mobile CPU with 1 GB Memory) and the improvement compare to the XP which was installed original, were immens and that Laptop work as it has been designed for Vista!

You yourself stated, in the same thread:

"As I've to deal with both OS I need to run them and frankly, i\Vista runs well for me. But to get it that stage was a quite long journey and I've to tweak Vista down to the bottom. What I've done will be impossible for the most of the users for many reasons. It isn't easy at all!

Pesonally I would suggest Vista to Users with a lot experiences only. All others should stick with XP.

XP is a great system and very stable as well. In the real, there isn't any really need for change special if everything works fine."

This statement was done quite q while back and didn't applies for the today situation any more. Except if you use outdated Hardware. Vista is quite hardware intensive and to get it to work you need to have hardware with power enough to "feed" Vista. And without SP1, vista still is not as it should be. But still better than 1 1/2 year ago.

The today's problems with drivers for example, isn't an MS problem. Just let take the Driver for an Lexmark X215: 1. was need a long tme to get one and 2. the scanner scans green as red for example! So who is to blame?

I never was talk against XP and I tell it again that XP is an great system and for older computer where XP runs well, no one should think about to change to Vista.

But Vista is great as well and I wouldn't change back to XP for my own use. And many of my customers, all who using Vista, ad my friends wouldn't change back either.

Cheers.

[Guest Reimar]

I think Reimar's spell checker has committed suicide, or Vista doesn't have a driver for his keyboard

You like to listen the real? I'm to lazy to use one!

Cheers.

[b19bry]

"I don't have any experience with pirated versions of Vista, just OEM installs on some laptops in local offices that I support. My experience with Vista is admittedly limited, but in every case I have come away feeling disappointed. It wasn't driver issues or piracy, just that the OS felt sluggish and less responsive than I expected from new machines with decent specs. Even after i thinned out all the unnecessary startup apps and what not, it just felt like an old machine that was in bad need of an OS re-install.

There are ancient problems with windows that I hoped to see taken care of with Vista, like unreadable CDs causing a machine to lock up while it continuously tried to read the disc, but the problems are still there. I also have more networking issues on the Vista machines than the XP machines as well. One day is printer is available on the network, next day it's gone. I don't have some goal to make any OS look bad whether it's WinME, Vista or anythings else. I just use it and report what I find."

>>>100% agree Veazer and this has largely been my experience and that of a number of my colleagues with Vista too. None of these experiences involve pirated software or software installed on incorrect machines yet Reimar simply cannot get his head round this and continues to patronise us with rubbish like :

"OK, that someone will have some problems, is sure and I would never deny that. But you have to ask why that is so?!

Here in Thailand it's easy to get all software as a copy! And what you can't find at Pantip, you can download from the Torrents! All this software are modified in some or more ways but not more the originals.

And the real differences you'll find out while running that software. And believe it or not, I don't mind about that, but the problems some of my friends and customers was having with Vista, were with Pantip Copies and the use of OEM from Manufacturer like HP, Acer pp. on other than the original computers!"

>>>I too use originals only and haven't had anything but frustration and dissapointment with Vista.

[A_Traveller]

This is getting to the stage of 'I don't believe in <insert world famous landmark> exists because I haven't seen it'.

In the real world... IT Directors are voting with their budgets, Vista is, according to respected evaluations anticipated to have a take up rate of some 30% over the next couple of years {effectively double what it is now} with a seizable number suggesting that they will bypass it all together and look to 7. These are companies which take at least a year to evaluate and analyse the impact of such changes

Further based on stats from MS, Vista had sold in excess of 140 million licenses by end Q1 '08 {To be blunt I'm really not convinced that matches live active systems}. However, even if this figure is taken as accurate, this evaluated to a 14.57% share of the operating system market whilst Windows XP accounted for a share of 73.07%. By the by this number down from a high of 85.02% {Jan 07}. Given PC shipping numbers of over 250 million in the past year, it is clear to see that Vista's growth comes mainly from acquisitions of new machines rather than from upgrades. This has even been confirmed, to a degree by Keith Coombs one of the MS IT Pro Evangelist team {I hate that term! [Look I used an exclamation point ]} when he was recorded as commenting that '... [customers appear not to be] upgrading existing Windows XP machines to Windows Vista. Instead, they are just buying new machines with Windows Vista as the old XP machines roll off the books and are re-purposed, or die ...' In addition he noted 'None of the security, network, search, etc. improvements warrant an upgrade of an existing machine, even with Aero glass turned off so that it performs on par or better than Windows XP?" presumably asked rhetorically.

In point of fact the whole upgrade issue was {is} a source of commercial annoyance since, believe it or not the MS TCO figures for Vista did not include upgrade costs, something which caused a number of major corporates to recalculate and led them from an economic standpoint to be unable to reconcile a persuasive argument for the switch to Vista, even if it had not been perceived unfavourably. {This ironically is where all the security 'enhancements' matter falls, since many corporates use system independent security devices, and, often ensure equipment is locked down.}

I know that there was expectation that SPs 1 & 3 {Vista & XP respectively} would create more traction, with SP1 creating a wave of reviews and upgrades but there is thus far no evidence to support that, in short at least prior to XP being 'removed' there was still little commercial customer led system upgrade activity.

Ironically though, given the 'code base share' 2008 Server is anticipated to be treated as a run of business upgrade, though again there's little evidence of a groundswell of commissioning ahead of planned equipment roll schedules.

Regards

Sources include:- Gartner, Net Applications, Reuters, Microsoft.

Edited July 7, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Guest Reimar]

"I don't have any experience with pirated versions of Vista, just OEM installs on some laptops in local offices that I support. My experience with Vista is admittedly limited, but in every case I have come away feeling disappointed. It wasn't driver issues or piracy, just that the OS felt sluggish and less responsive than I expected from new machines with decent specs. Even after i thinned out all the unnecessary startup apps and what not, it just felt like an old machine that was in bad need of an OS re-install.

There are ancient problems with windows that I hoped to see taken care of with Vista, like unreadable CDs causing a machine to lock up while it continuously tried to read the disc, but the problems are still there. I also have more networking issues on the Vista machines than the XP machines as well. One day is printer is available on the network, next day it's gone. I don't have some goal to make any OS look bad whether it's WinME, Vista or anythings else. I just use it and report what I find."

>>>100% agree Veazer and this has largely been my experience and that of a number of my colleagues with Vista too. None of these experiences involve pirated software or software installed on incorrect machines yet Reimar simply cannot get his head round this and continues to patronise us with rubbish like :

"OK, that someone will have some problems, is sure and I would never deny that. But you have to ask why that is so?!

Here in Thailand it's easy to get all software as a copy! And what you can't find at Pantip, you can download from the Torrents! All this software are modified in some or more ways but not more the originals.

And the real differences you'll find out while running that software. And believe it or not, I don't mind about that, but the problems some of my friends and customers was having with Vista, were with Pantip Copies and the use of OEM from Manufacturer like HP, Acer pp. on other than the original computers!"

>>>I too use originals only and haven't had anything but frustration and dissapointment with Vista.

Isn't that true what I wrote?

Just a simple example: We started a service with a new customer. In the startup meeting we asked about the legality of the available software and the answer was: "Sir we use original and licensed Software only!" As we started to check the system we reached very fast the reality which was: from 13 computer 1 with original Windows XP pro and Office 2003 Enterprise! From the rest of 12 used 3 the same copy the original Windows, which illegal and 1 a copy of the Original Office 2003 which is also illegal! the rest was using some copies of Windows XP from illusion and several copies of Office 2003 with pirated corporate S/N! Not any License of Adobe CS 2 Suite or any of the other software.

If you think that is just an expetion than you're wrong! And you're wrong as well to tell that I patronise you with rubbish like that. It's nothing but Reality in the dailylife.

You're maybe an holy user of original software only, we have to take your word for it and I don't deny that! Isn't it? And I for my person also don't mind about that, you can do or use what you want or like!

And I even don't mind you believe me or not about my experiences I have with customers, friends and my own systems. But you please accept that others are different with different experiences.

[b19bry]

"Isn't that true what I wrote?"

>>>>Err........if you're referring to :

"OK, that someone will have some problems, is sure and I would never deny that. But you have to ask why that is so?!

>>>>NO it's absolutely NOT TRUE, you're using your experiences (which I'm not doubting) to generalise and assume that all user issues are as a result of pirated software when the consensus being presented to you is far from that.

"You're maybe an holy user of original software only, we have to take your word for it and I don't deny that! Isn't it?"

>>>>Simply, the laptop I use is a company asset and they expressly forbid and won't contemplate the use of pirated software.

"But you please accept that others are different with different experiences."

I do........is there any chance you can do the same ?

[dotcom]

A Traveller. Thanks.

As Paul Harvey would say "Now you know the rest of the story."

When are the dopes at Mikrokrap going to let us lease the software? Till they do I'll run pirate.

Obsolesence seems to be built in.

[Guest Reimar]

"Isn't that true what I wrote?"

>>>>Err........if you're referring to :

"OK, that someone will have some problems, is sure and I would never deny that. But you have to ask why that is so?!

>>>>NO it's absolutely NOT TRUE, you're using your experiences (which I'm not doubting) to generalise and assume that all user issues are as a result of pirated software when the consensus being presented to you is far from that.

No I don't generalize but point to the "normal" situation in Thailand, which is special aplied to the private sector but to the business sector in some percentage as well

"You're maybe an holy user of original software only, we have to take your word for it and I don't deny that! Isn't it?"

>>>>Simply, the laptop I use is a company asset and they expressly forbid and won't contemplate the use of pirated software.

I haven't deny that!

"But you please accept that others are different with different experiences."

I do........is there any chance you can do the same ?

I haven't deny that others having other experiences which is very normal. But if you read 90% + of the time negative comments only about a system wich is for yourself, your customers and your friend very well, than the question come up about: How that could be happens?!

From a logical point of view, that's just impossible.

Fact is, that I had some problems before SP1 and had to tweak the system to get it stable to work.

After SP1 arrived and I was use the procedure as described in an post before, the system works vefry well and I don't need to tweak it any more, it just work perfect.

Cheers.

[b19bry]

>>>>NO it's absolutely NOT TRUE, you're using your experiences (which I'm not doubting) to generalise and assume that all user issues are as a result of pirated software when the consensus being presented to you is far from that.

No I don't generalize but point to the "normal" situation in Thailand,

>>>>That's the SAME THING !! yet not representative of Vista installs per se

which is special aplied to the private sector but to the business sector in some percentage as well

"You're maybe an holy user of original software only, we have to take your word for it and I don't deny that! Isn't it?"

>>>>Simply, the laptop I use is a company asset and they expressly forbid and won't contemplate the use of pirated software.

I haven't deny that!

>>>>You're original phraseology implies sarcasm and a level of doubt

"But you please accept that others are different with different experiences."

I do........is there any chance you can do the same ?

I haven't deny that others having other experiences which is very normal. But if you read 90% + of the time negative comments only about a system wich is for yourself, your customers and your friend very well, than the question come up about: How that could be happens?!

From a logical point of view, that's just impossible

>>>>That's called an Enigma

Fact is, that I had some problems before SP1 and had to tweak the system to get it stable to work.

>>>Good for you, but then your a Pro right ?

After SP1 arrived and I was use the procedure as described in an post before, the system works vefry well and I don't need to tweak it any more, it just work perfect.

>>>Really....... I'm so happy for you

Cheers.

[dotcom]

It can not be overemphasized how important the kernel of WIN2K was. Finally we had an OS that was rock stable. I had only had it a short time till I decided I needed a dual CPU motherboard to make it run right. I went on the internet & found i-will DVD266 motherboard. Found a dealer in Thailand & bought one. That tower is still running today. Programs running on XP will crash but the OS almost never does.

Quantum leap for Microkrap.

The same kernel is the basis for WINXP Pro.

So before you ask Thai people to shell out 2 months pay for an new OS you need to tell us why we need it. VISTA looks like it is aimed at the facebook crowd. You know 13 YO girls.

Maybe I'll buy a pirate copy & try it. Illusionsoft for sure.

[slackula]

Who is Vista marketed at? OS X and Linux users aren't going to switch, XP works well enough after all these years for most people who use Windows.

Gamers? Maybe, but as I understand it only takes a minute or so to hack a .cfg file and Crysis will run with full options on XP.

Businesses? Why does somebody in accounting need a computer with 512 MB of dedicated graphics RAM on a 3D card to use Excel? Sure, you can turn off all the eye-candy and it will then run on lesser hardware, but why would I upgrade to a new OS if I have to turn off all the new "features" in order to get it to run?

Microsoft's only option to get people to use it seems to be forcing computer vendors to stop installing XP, except when they pay for a "downgrade" which MS can rack up as a Vista sale even though the box is shipped with XP.

I dunno, but it seems that Vista is a liability. I remember that Longhorn was being touted with all these new features that were stripped one by one from Vista.

Vista has become a stop-gap solution to a problem that did not exist outside of Microsoft's sales and marketing department for the vast majority of users. Hopefully Windows 7 will actually offer a good reason for regular users to upgrade.

[Steve2UK]

Who is Vista marketed at? OS X and Linux users aren't going to switch, XP works well enough after all these years for most people who use Windows.

Gamers? Maybe, but as I understand it only takes a minute or so to hack a .cfg file and Crysis will run with full options on XP.

Businesses? Why does somebody in accounting need a computer with 512 MB of dedicated graphics RAM on a 3D card to use Excel? Sure, you can turn off all the eye-candy and it will then run on lesser hardware, but why would I upgrade to a new OS if I have to turn off all the new "features" in order to get it to run?

Microsoft's only option to get people to use it seems to be forcing computer vendors to stop installing XP, except when they pay for a "downgrade" which MS can rack up as a Vista sale even though the box is shipped with XP.

I dunno, but it seems that Vista is a liability. I remember that Longhorn was being touted with all these new features that were stripped one by one from Vista.

Vista has become a stop-gap solution to a problem that did not exist outside of Microsoft's sales and marketing department for the vast majority of users. Hopefully Windows 7 will actually offer a good reason for regular users to upgrade.

Spot on, IMO.

Given that my interest in the eye candy is zero, the sole reason I would even consider Vista would be to access Direct-X 10 for certain games - but a] I've yet to identify the significance of those Direct-X plusses and b] I also suspect that hacks will appear for at least some of the main games to enable it for XP.

Given that no OS that I can remember has worked 100% "out of the box" from the get-go (nor is likely to), I have no problem installing patches/hotfixes/service packs as the need for them emerges. As to apps vendors not putting maximum effort into developing/releasing fully Vista-ready drivers - I see that as fair game for criticism......... except that I also see it as yet another sign that a huge part of the industry is at least sceptical about Vista and how much it will be taken up as a voluntary upgrade replacement for XP in the way that XP was for 98.

[Ajarn_Jonesy]

It can not be overemphasized how important the kernel of WIN2K was. Finally we had an OS that was rock stable. I had only had it a short time till I decided I needed a dual CPU motherboard to make it run right. I went on the internet & found i-will DVD266 motherboard. Found a dealer in Thailand & bought one. That tower is still running today. Programs running on XP will crash but the OS almost never does.

Quantum leap for Microkrap.

The same kernel is the basis for WINXP Pro.

So before you ask Thai people to shell out 2 months pay for an new OS you need to tell us why we need it. VISTA looks like it is aimed at the facebook crowd. You know 13 YO girls.

Maybe I'll buy a pirate copy & try it. Illusionsoft for sure.

WOW Lots and Lots of opinions here.

vista vs xp which is better. That depends on a lot of reasons.

I remember reading at the beginning someone seeing a post where only 8% of developers are coding for vista. This is very true. Problem with that article on cnet and the Evans Data reports is in the way it is stated. Devs have a tendency to code for a specific platform which in most cases is going to be some form of .net. be it v1.143, or 2.0 or even 3.0. The code that is written will work on windows xp or vista desktops if the correct version of .net redistrib is installed. I don't believe that many developers code for a specific OS version, if they do well then I don't want to support that code.

For the VISTA vs XP debate.

Lots of information and ideas stated for and against the use of Vista.

So from an Application Engineer and * Pirated* copies aside.

From a enterprise level organization (Intel, GE, Citi etc. etc)

It does not make sense to upgrade to vista due to the following constraints.

1. Legacy applications that may not work with vista.

2. Hardware needs. who is going to spend the money to upgrade 80,000 desktops just so you can move to vista. Employees out side of Development or Marketing really don't need Pc's that will run vista. Vista really is not needed for use of sending email, using office or other business specific applications.

For businesses the move to vista doesn't make sense at least not initially. It can take at least 2 years for a large enterprise to upgrade due to constraints on applications and budgets.

From and End user view point

Stability and usability are gray areas here, depending on the user knowledge, experience and use of windows.

From a Usability view (home users in particular) learning to use Vista can be a daunting task.

Graphically vista is a bit different layout than what they have had with XP. Also the Vista base install security options are a pain for home users. The User Account Control is a real pain for someone who is new to vista.

I agree that drivers are getting better for vista, and stability is much better with SP1.

I think a lot of users get angry with Vista because of the 2 afore mentioned problems and decide to go back to XP.

A problem here, if you have bought a new consumer PC desktop or laptop (hp, dell, Ibm) it comes with Vista installed. You will most likely have a problem finding drivers for it that are compatible with XP. Dell and Hp are not creating XP drivers for many of their newest products. And as we all know the vista drivers wont work with XP.

All in all I think Vista has the ability to be a very solid OS. From my experience I don't like the OS because it is so hardware intensive and to pretty. But then again I am a born again MS guy who found the lite of the open source side:)

BTW>... I am curious about Remer's comment "5 minute boot to 45 seconds" Please by all means let me know what kind of hardware you are running to make this happen. Reason I ask I have never seen a PC boot up in 45 seconds so if this is possible I want the hardware...

[Guest Reimar]

I am curious about Remer's comment "5 minute boot to 45 seconds" Please by all means let me know what kind of hardware you are running to make this happen. Reason I ask I have never seen a PC boot up in 45 seconds so if this is possible I want the hardware...

Gigabyte GA-MA 770-DS3/S3, AMD AM2 X2 5000, 8 GB Memory (4x2 GB Dual channel) OCZ 4-3-3, 8500 GT Extreme 2 x 320 GB SATA 2 Hitachi,

1 HDD with Vista Ultimate 64 bit and the 2. HDD with Server 2008 64 Bit.

Bootup time HDD 1= 45-50 sec and HDD 2 55-60 sec

Cheers.