Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Vista Just Because?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 MattV

MattV

  • Members
  • 736 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Asheville NC
  • Local time:08:36 AM

Posted 14 August 2007 - 02:04 PM

One of the things I can say about Micro$oft, is that each version of Windows they come up with is worse than the previous one. I'm using XP only because that's what was on the machine when I bought it. I tried to cajole Staple into installing '98 for me instead, but they said they couldn't do it (which means it was forbidden by the Powers That Be).

So now they've created "Vista". So, how many are using it now, and why? Was their a careful weighing of options involved, or did you get it just because it was a brand new toy? I've been keeping my old HP alive, upgrading/replacing what I can, when I can afford it. I know that if I bought a new computer now, I'd end up with an "improved" (meaning worse) OS than what I have now. It took me long enough to figure out how to get around the vagaries and built in stoppers of XP - I wouldn't want to have to do it all over again with another M$ "improvement".

So if you're using Vista now, why? And if you haven't jumped on the Vista bandwagon, why not?

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Mr Alpha

Mr Alpha

  • Members
  • 1,875 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland
  • Local time:02:36 PM

Posted 14 August 2007 - 02:29 PM

I have to disagree. I have to disagree most strongly. Sure, you can discuss whether the new Windows version are worth the money and trouble, and how good an OS Windows really is. But saying the new version is worse than the previous? That's just wrong. They are most defiantly improvements (ME may be an exception).

Windows 98 was an horrible OS. I'm still having nightmares about it. I went to XP early because I was looking at a system format and reinstall anyway. The early days were painful, but I still preferred the early XP to 98. My jump to Vista resulted from similar situation, but I was more fancy about it and setup a dual-boot with Vista and XP. I have not boot into XP in months, and have been thinking about getting rid of it because I have no use for it.

Comparing 98 to Vista: I've gone from a quarterly format and reinstall to a yearly format and reinstall.
"Anyone who cannot form a community with others, or who does not need to because he is self-sufficient [...] is either a beast or a god." Aristotle
Intel Core 2 Quad | XFX 780i SLI | 8GB Corsair | Gigabyte GeForce 8800GTX | Auzentech X-Fi Prelude| Logitech G15 | Logitech MX Revolution | LG Flatron L2000C | Logitech Z-5500 Digital

#3 JohnWho

JohnWho

    Who was running the store?


  • Members
  • 2,611 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay Area, Florida, USA
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 14 August 2007 - 04:40 PM

For the most part, each version of Windows, especially 95 and above, has cost about the same but has included more features. I'll agree, though, that Me arguably wasn't a step forward.

Sure, for example, the Calendar in Vista isn't a feature laden and robust as some other products, but as a freebie, it may be all most folks will use.


I'm with Mr. Alpha - Vista is another step in the right direction.


I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!


#4 cowsgonemadd3

cowsgonemadd3

    Feed me some spyware!


  • Banned
  • 4,557 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:11 PM

Vista wont run a lot of software and its got all kinds of annoying "Do you want to allow this" junk that needs to be shut off. Everything is moved as its just to simple for Microsoft to continue using a easy to use layout. My computer was just to much to say now on vista its just "Computer".

Vista loves ram and that cool invisible task bar thing I can do that on XP easily and free.

Is Vista more secure? Maybe but probably not for long. Then vista is a mess to get it to hibernate its got something like a stasis but wont HIBERNATE and kill the power like XP unless you go through all this mess of settings to make it hibernate. Another feature that was just to simple for Microsoft to leave alone.

From what I have used vista I dont like it. I might just wait out for the two more years when Microsoft's new OS comes out code names "7".

#5 MattV

MattV
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 736 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Asheville NC
  • Local time:08:36 AM

Posted 14 August 2007 - 09:50 PM

...saying the new version is worse than the previous? That's just wrong.

The downhill slide began with '98, when M$ decided that DOS was no longer useful. Ans how is making an OS bigger and clunkier an "improvement". And how many hundreds of security fixes are Vista users going to have to install from the clunky M$ update site?

For the most part, each version of Windows, especially 95 and above, has cost about the same but has included more features.

Let's see, XP will fill itself up with junk until it's become virtually useless. Is that a "feature"?

Somewhere, lurking in a garage or cellar, is a small group of geniuses developing a voice-driven OS. I'll stick with XP 'til they decide to surface and blow M$ out of the water. :thumbsup:


Mod Edit: Edited to merge 3 posts, each made 3 minutes apart. If you have additional information to add, before someone else posts, please edit your post to include the information, instead of adding additional posts. ~tg

Edited by tg1911, 16 August 2007 - 09:11 AM.


#6 JohnWho

JohnWho

    Who was running the store?


  • Members
  • 2,611 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay Area, Florida, USA
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 14 August 2007 - 10:18 PM

For the most part, each version of Windows, especially 95 and above, has cost about the same but has included more features.

Let's see, XP will fill itself up with junk until it's become virtually useless. Is that a "feature"?


It must be since you plan to continue to use it:

I'll stick with XP ...


:thumbsup:


I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!


#7 jhsmurray

jhsmurray

  • Members
  • 383 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:6,378 km above the Earth's core
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 15 August 2007 - 05:00 AM

I'm using Vista (home premium) because I needed a laptop quickly and the retailer only sold ones loaded with Vista. Although change usually means progress (often in a meandering for-better-or-for-worse sort of way) there are a few things that bother me about it, particularly about tediously redundant permissions requests and the occasional requirement for "elevated" status. I know these features were developed in my own best interest and I suppose if I get more proficient with the settings I could get used to it - but I'm not a huge fan of change. When I had XP I always set the menu system to "classic" to be more like its predecessor :flowers: On the plus side, I dont mind the Vista aero theme so much. All that remains is getting some of my XP compliant software to run on it. :thumbsup:

Edited by jhsmurray, 15 August 2007 - 05:04 AM.


Acer Aspire 5732z
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
Processor: Intel Pentium III Xeon, 2200 MHz
RAM: 3 GB
Display: Mobile Intel GMA 4500M

#8 MattV

MattV
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 736 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Asheville NC
  • Local time:08:36 AM

Posted 15 August 2007 - 08:21 AM

For the most part, each version of Windows, especially 95 and above, has cost about the same but has included more features.

Let's see, XP will fill itself up with junk until it's become virtually useless. Is that a "feature"?


It must be since you plan to continue to use it:

I'll stick with XP ...


:thumbsup:

I'll continue to use it because I'm getting too old to face whatever new nightmares await Vista users. As far as I'm concerned, M$ could have stopped with '95 - at least with that you still had DOS to use to get the real work done. If M$ wanted to really improve their OS, it would boot into DOS, under which you could run Windows, if you wanted to.

#9 cowsgonemadd3

cowsgonemadd3

    Feed me some spyware!


  • Banned
  • 4,557 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 15 August 2007 - 08:41 AM

My first pc was a windows 3.11 from packerd bell when everyone else had windows 95. I have always wondered whats so special about DOS and how come you need it to do "the real work"?

#10 BlackSpyder

BlackSpyder

    Bleeping Big Rig


  • BC Advisor
  • 2,456 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Huddleston, VA USA (Home Sweet Home)
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 15 August 2007 - 04:35 PM

My first pc was a windows 3.11 from packerd bell when everyone else had windows 95. I have always wondered whats so special about DOS and how come you need it to do "the real work"?


MS-DOS was a wonderful thing. It allowed running games and applications without the OS GUI taking up all the RAM (64 MB as it was), it allowed the user more control over the system, it gave you a backup when windows BSOD'ed so you could fix windows. I will never see Vista unless Im overwriting it with with Linux (which BTW still has a Command Line Interface backup to do those things). Win2k was great, 3.11 for work groups was better, Vista is a resource hog even on machines built to run it.

Posted Image




#11 Bachiatari

Bachiatari

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:GA, USA
  • Local time:06:36 AM

Posted 15 August 2007 - 06:33 PM

I was advised by a friend that Vista is a digital dictator, especially when it comes to multimedia. The only reason I haven't switched to and learned the ways of Linux is I haven't had the time. =/

Edited by Bachiatari, 15 August 2007 - 06:51 PM.


#12 need TOS

need TOS

  • Members
  • 888 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Akron,OH
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 15 August 2007 - 09:53 PM

My first pc was a windows 3.11 from packerd bell when everyone else had windows 95. I have always wondered whats so special about DOS and how come you need it to do "the real work"?


MS-DOS was a wonderful thing. It allowed running games and applications without the OS GUI taking up all the RAM (64 MB as it was), it allowed the user more control over the system, it gave you a backup when windows BSOD'ed so you could fix windows. I will never see Vista unless Im overwriting it with with Linux (which BTW still has a Command Line Interface backup to do those things). Win2k was great, 3.11 for work groups was better, Vista is a resource hog even on machines built to run it.

I agree Win 3.11 WFWG was great... but if only there were more support for DOS...
Oh well I can dream
Forgiveness is forgetting about a past that could have been

#13 yano

yano

    I can see what you post!


  • Members
  • 6,469 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:06:36 AM

Posted 16 August 2007 - 07:41 AM

Just get Ubuntu, and leave all your worries behind. :thumbsup: I know I did.

#14 cowsgonemadd3

cowsgonemadd3

    Feed me some spyware!


  • Banned
  • 4,557 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 16 August 2007 - 09:23 AM

I tried ubuntu and I would rather stick to something that loads my programs.

#15 need TOS

need TOS

  • Members
  • 888 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Akron,OH
  • Local time:07:36 AM

Posted 16 August 2007 - 09:53 AM

I did not like Ubuntu that much, hence my reason for using PCLOS, and buying Xandros Home Premium 4.0 :D

-Steve
Forgiveness is forgetting about a past that could have been




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users