That's a very silly statement, but I won't try to explain you "why", because you just can't understand the tech terminology. RTFM. Period.

I like Vista. I've had ZERO problems. I would say it is slightly better than XP.

Picture it. The internet October 2001. Millions of XP haters running around saying they would never leave Win 98 and it was vastly superior to the bloat ware that is Win XP. Slide forward to 2007 and into 2008. The SAME THING IS HAPPENING AGAIN! :1orglaugh:error

I know I know you are going to talk about forced drm blah blah blah. Blah... :1orglaugh

I guess you were among them. But sorry, I can't imagine that situation, because I was never using Win'98. I had NT 3, NT 4 then Win2K and XP with service pack, so all these stupid "pictures" are not for me :2 cents:

P.S. The situation with Vista has nothing common with XP. It like a story with Windows ME - both "operating systems are just poor m$ miscarriages.

Again I have my super golden special copy of Vista that has no issues. Bill Gates is actually my father, so I got one of the few copies that runs perfectly with no crashes, no slow downs, no compatibility issues, no driver issues. On 4 machines, 3 built by me, one built by toshiba. 0 issues. Must be de luck of de Irish!! But Im only like 25% Irish, so who knows.

I agree completely. It is really surprising how many people defend Vista when there is not a single thing that is does better and so many things that it does worse. It is really something. :disgust

This means that some device that you put in that system was not on the Hardware Compatibility List for Vista.

Which brings us back to why Apple users always thumb their noses at PC users. Apple works, but you can't build your own Apple from scratch (ahem...unless of course you use that special distro floating on the torrents).

Microsoft tightened down their compatible hardware vendor list by including those who wrote drivers specifically tested to give the best performance under Windows Vista. One device that doesn't have properly written drivers can muck up an entire system. If your hardware vendor codes crappy drivers or simply ported em over from the XP ones, crossed their fingers and hoped for the best, you can't blame that on Microsoft.

"Cool" So why the hell someone have to install a system which "may" not be compatible with the existing hardware? Any SANE reason for such a downgrade if you surely know that XP has no such a problem at all?

Actually I know why the ppl are doing this. We are working in adult industry and know that BDSM sells very well...

shows how much you know Win 98 sucked ass windows 2000 was much quicker then XP and even today on old hardware windows 2000 will kill XP.

I guess people running windows 98 instead of a real OS back then would like vista :)

windows 2000 was the greatest operating system they ever built.

Did I ever say 98 was good? No I said that was what people were saying back then. Especially in the gaming community.

There are several reasons why XP is viewed as more "stable" than Vista right now:

-Drivers for XP have been written and rewritten from 2001. The bugs have all been squashed years ago! Any hardware that is incompatible with XP at this point is obviously obsolete.

- Microsoft does not force manufacturers to update their drivers for new OS'es. That's Apple's policy. Get it right. Instead of recoding drivers for an entire product line, many manufacturers took the gamble and only coded for their most recent offerings. Then they dealt with recoding for other products according to support and vendor requests. The hardware game is always evolving, why would a manufacturer waste time and money coding new drivers for something when the client is most likely going to replace that device in a year or two? Think about it. Unfortunately, persons like yourself place the blame exclusively on Microsoft's lap.

Maybe to shut everyone up perhaps Microsoft should come out with its own Microsoft computer line that runs flawlessly like the ones from manufacturers who pay strict attention to following the HCL and SCL. Wait a sec, then that whole monopoly thing comes into play again...nevermind.

The fact of the matter is that many XP drivers can work with Windows Vista, but are not as stable as they should be. This is why Microsoft came out with the VUA, HCL and the SCL months in advance of the beta version of Vista. It's too bad that many techs and pc enthusiasts ignored that tool and the compatibility lists due to their own cockiness and know-it-all attitudes. In a way, Vista shows exactly who are the techies who have become stagnant in their thinking. A tech is supposed to solve problems, not bitch about 'em to everyone in their virtual space.

In a year or two as people replace/upgrade their systems to newer parts that proper drivers have been written for, the naysayers will start seeing that Vista is better and more stable than any other end user version of Windows. You may call Vista a downgrade, but you WILL change your tune in time.

But no answer on my main question: why should anybody downgrade to Vista?

It will kill XP even on a new hardware. The only reason I moved to XP is that Win2k is no longer supported. In all other cases Win2k is much better.

i have to somewhat disagree once you get into dual core cpu's and 2+ gigs of ram you cant really tell a difference.

just like once we get to 12 core cpu's we wont notice that vista takes 1-2 cores just for the OS :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I didn't answer it because that question is not logical. Vista is not a downgrade, except in your incorrect opinion which you're completely entitled to have.

:thumbsup

sooo.. some good vista tweaking sites would be??

yes I am too lazy to search through all of them. Just asking if know some good ones

Actually it is. Win XP also works well with multi-core cpu's. Vista has no useful feature at all. It's just bigger, slower and more buggy. I consider this as downgrade.

As about mult-core. It's more important to make the applications to support it. If they don't, nothing will help to improve their speed.

Oh fuck Dirty F is right people really are stupid...

How could you have never seen one screen cap or image of Vista?

haha this is pretty funny

I have one comment about this. I loved DOS because it came with a 400+ page manual covering every command, including how to make batch menus and whatnot. Even Windows 3.11 had a passable manual. These days you get a CD rom and a "Quick Start Guide" that only tells you how to insert a CD and press "OK." If you want me to enjoy using your program, TELL ME HOW TO USE IT. No, I don't want to go try to figure out which book on Amazon covers the right version and application of your software, then wait for it to arrive. I want the info to come with the software. And no, a Help menu does not count as a manual.

ARG.

</end rant>

some of you are really getting bent out of shape over vista... it's just an operating system, relax, whether it's better or worse than xp is debatable, but that's the direction we are all headed anyway, so might as well jump on the bandwagon now, instead of being forced to in a year or 2 when microsoft stops supporting xp...

xp will be supported till 2014, so we have a lot of time to wait for a good replacement :)

You are so right it sucks.

I use vista business and have no issues with it.

great post and says it all :2 cents:

That "great post" shows nothing but ignorance of the facts about Vista and the well-known, steady increase in terms of hardware requirements for EVERY MS OS since DOS, but carry on smartly...

Instead of listening to people who are at the top levels of the industry in terms of tech, some of you guys just want to continue to lambaste Vista. Some of the things posted here against that OS are so illogical that it almost hurts to read them.

This situation can be compared to a relative porn newbie like me telling the top earners in the adult industry how their programs suck and don't make any money. They would just laugh, shake their heads and say, "Go fuck yourself, you fucking idiot! You don't know what you're talking about." And they would be right.

Listen, learn and research. Microsoft has designed a website full of information about its products in detail, with phone and online tech support. Then again, it's easier to slap something down you don't know about or couldn't figure out for some reason, than to admit your own shortcomings.

Vista IS a solid, and well-designed product, people. I've pushed it in corporate offshore banking environments all the way down to my retail biz's home users. My suggestion is to get proper tech advice if something appears to be "wrong" with your Vista install instead of jumping the gun, naively declaring things a total loss, and reinstalling because you happen to be familiar with XP. Such behavior only adds to the overall misperception about the product.

There are certified persons who can help ya know? And we get paid very well to do so. If everyone could do it, then everyone would be in tech.

Worst place to have a focus group like that. An anti-trend faggot community of whiny bitches.

Take it to Duluth MN and try it.

LOL, dude I was working as a senior developer during 5 years (low-level MS-DOS and Windows programming). I know much more than you think, and I know much more than I can say here. I was working on 3rd-party tools for m$ .NET when it was known to a limited group of developers as the "Lightning" project, and was under Microsoft NDA for years. I know very well how exactly all the Windows OS's work on a core level. You may disagree with my point of view, but you can't call me an ignorant person when we are talking about m$ operating systems :2 cents:

pretty interesting

I use Vista on my new PC here and I love it.

+1 for ubuntu. I think that paying upwards of $300 for an os is not a wise investment considering there are many linux desktops that are available for free with *almost the same polished look and feel as Microsoft products.

Yes, they have the same look and feel as MS products but there are no decent software apps. To get anything done you'll end up running your old apps in wine so you might as well just have a microsoft os.

I have the Vista CDs, Full licence, but am simply not upgradeing.

I thought it was stated by Microsoft themselves that in a couple of years the new os to replace Vista is going to be rolled out...... might as well wait and skip over Vista altogether if at all possible ( I have vista on one of my laptops and it is too much of a hassle to switch it over to XP or I would do it.... I for sure would have bought it with XP instead of Vista if the choice had been offered) :2 cents:

lol these threads are always the same :1orglaugh

i run vista on a laptop, the only problems i've had is if i leave it running for a few days then it runs a bit sluggish until it's rebooted. Also, i don't like the fact that it still takes ages to unzip or move a large file :(

I use Vista and haven't had any problems with it whatsoever. I use the entire Adobe cs3 suite every day, and I don't notice my laptop slowing down one bit. I have no reason to hate it.

Hating Microsoft has become very fashionable lately. I have a client who is deathly afraid of upgrading to Vista, solely because of what a creative agency told him. This creative agency is full of mac users. Why would they ever say anything positive about windows?

It's really sad that our decisions to use products are made for us by clever marketing strategies.

http://castingoutnines.files.wordpre...mac-people.jpg

My older, slower machine running XP outperforms my newer, faster machine running Vista. Besides that annoyance Vista works well for me and runs all of my programs. The only thing that failed for me was an older Creative Labs Extigy (external) sound box.

m

See the results for yourself.
 

Results of the Mojave Experiment - Today July 29th @ http://www.mojaveexperiment.com/

I've been doing pretty well on Vista, and I'm a hardcore user with 3 quadcore 3D rigs, and serious network activity. I abuse the fuck out of my setup on a daily basis, and other than the initial security setup(so the machines can talk to each other properly), everything has been beautiful, and I'd never go back to XP.

This just in: When someone says your shit sucks, you can trick them by being subversive to try to make yourself appear as just an innocent bystander and not the provoker of the action which caused someone to call your shit, well, shit.

Also, a dog eating bees:

http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/2...ingbeesdn7.jpg

hmmmmmm...

Of all names to call the operation...

"Mojave" as in Dry Humor.

the real code is "Nella"


http://s1.directupload.net/images/080407/24odltux.jpg

it crashed on me non stop out of the box for 3 days..then i got all the drivers i needed to downgrade* to xp.
vista would fail miserably while attempting to do some very basic tasks.
and i run quad core 4 gig ram so its not the hardware...

Vista was brilliant. How else could Microsoft have united so many of their customers for one of their other products?

Which cases? Please explain in detail. Windows 2000 isn't "much better" than XP, it's pretty much the same fucking thing. XP was Microsoft's way of introducing the NT kernel to the masses after testing the waters with 2000 Professional.

I wouldn't be sitting here typing this in windows XP if windows 2000 was anything special, turn off all the fucking eye candy and XP and 2000 are pretty much indistinguishable from one and other. As far as kernel level things go, if anything has been slowed down in XP it's due to security additions/fixes, and we're talking a few hundred cps, not anything drastic like you are implying.


So please, I'm really interested in hearing what's so much faster/better in 2k than in XP. I want to know what I am missing.

What languages? What kind of tools? Is there a lot of lowlevel MSDOS programming in Windows 2k? You're dropping this in here like a guy whipping his cock out to compare it to everyone elses, so why not spill the beans. I assume by low level you are talking assembler, I'm game, speak to me. Tell me how windows XP and 2000 differ on a "core level".

Speed and "horsepower" isn't the issue. As asked many times previously, did ya follow the hardware and software compatibility lists?

1 single driver/software conflict or issue can mar the performance of Vista.

Too many people are forgetting the most basic rule of all: Make sure the system is 100% compatible (not just performance wise) before loading the OS.

You can have a supercharged engine but if one component isn't sealed right, connected properly or carries the flow of fuel in a correct way, the engine isn't worth crap.

Respect the OS. Do your research.

We use Macs, but I use a Vista laptop and desktop and I've never had a problem with it. It is not the best OS ever, but no OS ever is. It has its flaws, but to be honest it works.

I've never been a Microsoft lover and will use anything that is not Microsoft if I can. Unfortunately, due to compatibility with some of the stuff I use and like, the OS is not one of the things that I can change so easily.

And Linux for the desktop? Don't get me started... lol