Windows Vista - Do you like it?

[quinnox]

Hi, I'm very happy with windows XP, but I wanted to know what those who have gone to vista think about it and more importantly how it compares to xp.

Can you make it look like xp, cause I don't like fancy interfaces like I think vista has.

Anyway just asking how those that have vista like it, and how is it compared to xp.

[Clark2008]

1. Do you mean Office 2007 or Vista?

Office 2007 comes on the new Vista software.

In any case, I love Office 2007. The ribbons are more pleasing than the drop-downs.

And, yes you can run XP on Vista, but you can't make Office 2007 look like XP.

[quinnox]

3. no, vista only

I don't care about office

[Clark2008]

4. OK - so what fancy interfaces are you speaking of?

I LOVE the new search feature in the start menu and being able to flip through everything.

However, it is a lot to deal with all at once.

[quinnox]

8. Is it greatly different

in terms of menus and general operation system like going into the folders and so on.


The "look" of XP is something I like a lot, like the menus and how I can make them different color schemes and stuff.

Can you do that in Vista?

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Vista is why I finally went Mac.

Ain't gonna play Gates games no more. No spyware, no viri, no regrets.

[RedCappedBandit]

5. No. OS X and XP for me.

[hlthe2b]

11. Are you running Mac OSX and XP on same machine?

If yes, how's that working out? Are you using parallel software to do it?

I'm stuck since most software I NEED is not going to be Vista compatible any time soon. While I can order an XP laptop from Dell still, most other companies are saying they can not readily downgrade from Vista to XP due to driver issues. Thus, I'd be interested in hearing how running both on a MAC is working out.

[caraher]

19. I do run both and it works great

I have a year-old Intel MacBook Pro and run XP using Parallels when I absolutely have to. Performance is comparable to the older desktop PCs we have (and far, FAR better than any version of Virtual PC or other emulation software I've looked at in the past). I'm especially impressed by how transparent the internet connection is - if it works on the Mac side, it works fine in Parallels. I understand that not all devices work seamlessly, though that may have improved under newer versions of Parallels than mine.

[RedCappedBandit]

31. I have both on my mac, and also have a PC

But anyways, I have parallels and Boot Camp. Boot Camp is better, IMO, but parallels lets you run both systems simultaneously. Boot Camp simply lets you choose which to boot up when you turn the computer on. Parallels does not run smoothly on my 2.3 Macbook, but I hear it is great on the more powerful Macbook pro.
Using XP on boot camp though works just as it does on any other PC. It is certainly an adequate solution to your dilemma.

For the record, I've tried Vista. Don't like it. Certainly will never spend money on it.. probably won't use it on one of my own machines for years. :shrug:

[Liberal Veteran]

6. Vista is fine in and of itself. The hardware manufacturers on the other hand...

...are really lagging on getting decent drivers for their hardware.

It definitely isn't worth spending a bundle of money on right now because pretty much everything Vista does, XP does just as well.

Maybe in a year or so, things might be different.

[quinnox]

9. yea

I'm not goining to get vista until I buy a new computer and that won't be until 2009. By then it should be worthwhile I figure.

[William769]

7. Love it! Don't know how I lived without it.

Depends on which version of Vista you get. I have the premium edition. For me everything is streamlined and easier to find. One suggestion though, have ample RAM.

I am still "WOW" over Vista! :)

[Liberal Veteran]

10. For sheer wow factor, Beryl on Ubuntu Linux makes Aero look amateur.

I think Vista is fine, but it could be so much more.

[William769]

12. well it is in it's infancy.

I know this is a terrible excuse, but since I have been on Windows since 3.0... I guess you can't teach a old dog new tricks.

[alfredo]

41. You know the think pad will come with Linux very soon.

[Xithras]

25. Do you use DreamScene?

I had to disable it on my laptop because it tends to heat up the processor a little (which increases the fan speed and drops battery life), but it's very pretty. I always make sure it's on when someone asks to see "this Vista thing".

It's useless from a practical perspective, but it's gorgeous with the right background (I like the raindrops myself).

[William769]

30. You must have ultimate, it's not on premium.

:(

[skids]

13. If you go to a college or...

...will need to use this on anyone else's network who runs any sort of NAC (network admissions control, or in layperson speak "we don't allow you on the network unless you are all patched up") to make sure they feel ready to support Vista.

Where I work the desktop support folks pulled support for Vista a couple weeks ago and are having all staff migrate back to XP until Vista matures. People with personal Vista machines will only get support on a best effort basis, at the end of the queue behind the XP/OSX users. It was just too buggy and disobedient.

[eggman67]

14. I love it

but then again, I've been using it since beta 2 so I went through the pain early. I built my own box so drivers were an issue but not a showstopper. I just wish I could get 64-bit drivers so I can install the 64-bit version.

The new interface take a bit of gettin used to, but once you do it really is better, IMO.

[Jazzgirl]

15. I like Vista.

I have it on one box and XP Pro on another box and a laptop. I like the look and feel of it. I did have some issues with a printer driver but after about 2 months Epson finally came out with a driver for my printer. I like Office 2007 too but a lot of people miss the menus. Frankly, I don't miss them at all. I like the ribbons and tabs to find things. It takes a bit of time to locate all the features in the ribbons but it is nice. You just have to remember to save stuff in the old format if you're going to share files. Vista so far has been just as stable as XP for me.

[Ms. Toad]

16. Can't stand it.

Just a few observations (I use Vista on my replacement computer when mine is in the shop):

The file structure interface is completely different, and for me not intuitive, so it takes me forever to find the folders and files I need, particularly since I normally have at least two external memories attached to my computer.

The default setup when you open a folder which contain any image, video, or sound files displays a rating, but not the date of creation or modification. It is trainable, but so far I've had to train it for each new memory device I open.

The search tool, which I use extensively to find files created, modified, or accessed on a particular date is completely changed. It takes several additional windows to get to the window that lets you search by these attributes. (I have heard rumors that it is better at searching text - but haven't had the opportunity to test it out - the XP and earlier version was so poor I haven't thought to try it recently.)

Shut down is not intuitive (to me). It's one of the slide-over menus (like the start menu) that if you don't hit just right it closes before you can slide to the shut down key so you have to go back and retrieve the menu again.

Don't get me started on Office 2007. Unfortunately, since my computer decided to eat its OS and destroyed my Office suite in the process of reinstalling the original factory (trial) Office suite, I am temporarily using Office 2007. It took me 5 minutes to find what use to be "file" so that I could open a second document. Somehow the Windows circle logo in the upper left hand corner didn't say "file" to me... The Normal style is Calibri 11 pt font, with 1.15 line spacing and 10 pts after the paragraph. What about Times New Roman (or at least Lucida) with an integer line spacing. Since I use Styles in my documents, and most are based on the Normal style, this is a royal pain. And - unless you make a special effort, documents saved are not backwards compatible with previous versions of Word.

(Note: Although my preferred OS is DOS, I had no trouble learning the first Windows OS system I used or switching between any of the previous versions of the Windows OS. I expect permanently switching to Vista when I am ultimately forced to will be a royal pain.)

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

17. I was reading an article in the Computer OS section...

Of Computerworld the other day. It was about business and Vista. Pretty much, in all the cases of companies they talked to, their verdict on Vista was a flat "no". The article went on to say that they are looking very, very seriously at Desktop Linux and Mac OSX. And I mean real seriously.

FWIW.

[Sanctified]

18. I have read articles like that also.

And I think the primary factor is the amount of time it would take to retrain your work force for Vista is about the same as for OSX and Linux. And once you factor in the cost difference of Linux to Vista it's almost a no brainer.

[eggman67]

21. I can't agree with that at all

The learning curve to Vista from XP really isn't that steep. Also things like the new start menu and menuless explorer are optional. The old start menu is available as are the traditional menus in explorer. The user wouldn't have to enable them it could be done at deployment.

[Sanctified]

34. I use SuSE, OS X and Vista

Vista is no where near as intuitive as OS X or even SuSE. Microsoft in my opinion had an opportunity to create an extremely easy to use interface and instead made it way to complicated. Seriously I have seen people who have used Microsoft products their whole lives but still could not figure out how to shut down their computers with Vista after having it for a week. If people can not figure out how to shut down their computer with your OS their is a problem.

[eggman67]

36. My comment did not refer

to how Vista compares to other operating systems qualitatively. It referred to the learning curve. The learning curve from Win XP to Vista is simply not as steep as the learning curve to go from Win XP to anything else. It just isn't. Prior Windows exprience can be leveraged in Vista, not in the others. The only significant interface differences are the start menu and explorer, both of which can be reverted to the old interface - explorer partially and the start menu completely.

As far as people not being able to find shut down on the start menu that is still in the lower left after looking for it for a whole week! They're either an exaggeration or they're not very bright. They've used Microsoft products their whole lives and never encountered the F1 key? Didn't they bother taking that "What's new in Vista?" tour?

So let's see.

Shut down has always been on the Start Menu.

Well, the Start menu has always been that button on the lower left.

Click. Don't see Shut Down, but I do see Help & Support, let's try that. Or maybe just hit F1, that's always been Help in the past.

Hmm, a search box, I think I'll take a wild guess and type "Shut Down" in the search box.

WOW! The first hit is "What happened to the Shut Down option?" I think I'll click that.

ZOWIE! It's brought up a picture of where shut down is on the Start Menu!

Gosh, that took a whole 10 seconds.

To claim the learning curve is the same is just a gross overstatement.

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. Ok where do I start

I have ultimate on this macihne.

I've used Ubunto, Kbuntu and SUSE and you know what? The file system in vista is linux.. what is more, SUSE, Kbuntu and Ubuntu ARE far more intuitive from the users POV

If it wasn't becuase hubby uses this machine for gaming (which means we have a hell of a powerhorse), I would have passed on vista.

Hell Ubuntu and Wine would have been just as painful to make my win software run... and I mean that

[quinnox]

20. I'm not a fan of alternative operating systems

I've always use windows, hopefully by 2009 when I get vista they will have the kinks worked out.

[eggman67]

22. It's been amazingly stable since RC1.

I've had no issues at all since it went gold.

[quinnox]

23. good to hear

[david_vincent]

29. Windows is an alternative operating system

because it's just one among a slew of operating systems that anyone might choose to run. Why on earth anyone would choose to stay loyal to a company whose products are unusable when they're released is beyond me, but hey, it's your choice.

"hopefully by 2009 they will have the kinks worked out"?????? Would you cut ANY company that much slack when they're charging what they do for the damn thing?

Thank Qat someone here spoke up for Linux. I strongly recommend Linux (I use MEPIS) or PC-BSD over any version of Windows -- the learning curve you've heard so much about is mythical. Check it out or keep waiting, and paying, and waiting, and paying...

Oh yeah, by the way -- it's off topic, but hey, don't you folks realize that MS is deeply wedded to the State's surveillance programs?

[Xithras]

24. Works fine for me.

I've been running Vista Ultimate on one of my primary computers since release, and my home laptop runs Ultimate.

The UAC popups were annoying, so I canned that feature quickly. Other than that, I have no complaints. You DO want to ensure that your hardware is supported and that your system has enough ram though. You need 2GB minimum...my laptop was at 1GB when I upgraded, and it was slllooowww. Once I bumped that to 2GB it took off like a racehorse. No performance complaints at all.

The vast majority of complaints and horror stories about Vista tend to be from people running really old legacy apps or who are running unsupported hardware. There is a Vista compatibility checker on Microsoft's site. Download and run it FIRST. Make sure your hardware supports it. After that, check the publisher websites for your software programs and make sure they'll run on Vista. Do your homework and try to find any compatability issues BEFORE you install it.

If everything is Vista capable and you have enough RAM, the installation is incredibly smooth and the UI is very easy to learn. When I sit down at an Xp machine now, I tend to grumble at how long it takes me to navigate the menus to find things. Vista makes program access much faster...it's a bit different when you first load it up, but the learning curve is shallow and all of the changes were well thought out.

[Cronopio]

40. "There is a Vista compatibility checker on Microsoft's site. Download and run it FIRST."

For those of us who like to know that their operating system and their hardware are compatible out of the box, there is the Mac.

"Do your homework"? Why should we? Making demands of customers to jump through hoops AFTER they've shelled out thousand of dollars for a computer is what is driving more people away from Windows, and to Mac and Linux. Microsoft doesn't have a choice about whether to make those demands - they've built their business on not ensuring third-party compatibility for customers before the purchase - but customers increasingly have more and better choices than Microsoft.

That's why Microsoft is going down. It may take a few years, but the snowball has already started to roll.

[Xithras]

42. Oh bollocks.

Try to load Tiger on a G5 with no Firewire, or Panther on a beige G3 (it will run on all the OTHER G3's, just not the beige one). How about your Classic applications? I was freaking FURIOUS when I traded my G4 in for a new Mini and discovered that Classic doesn't work any more. App's that I've run since OS8, which migrated into OS9 and OSX without qualm, suddenly quit working. There is no workaround, and the standard response I get is "Buy newer software". I did, but that also happens to be my response to people who whine about compatibility in Windows.

Mac's have compatibility issues too...Mac users just prefer to ignore them (and most PC users don't know enough about Mac's to throw the examples back at them...I'm an exception there). Don't even get me started about hardware compatibility in Linux.

I have many computers, ranging from a new Mac Pro, to a pair of Vista boxen, to XP boxes, to the Linux triplets (Ubuntu, RedHat, and Slackware), to MS Server. I know what I'm talking about.

And I've heard the snowball comment before. I heard it when Windows 95 was released (it was "too different" from 3.11, and all the users were going to flee for the more familiar MacOS or OS/2), I heard it when Windows 98 was released (too much bloat...users were going to flee for the faster MacOS or the leaner BeOS), I heard it when Windows 2000 was released (the system requirements were too high...users were going to flee for the more efficient Linux or the more modern OSX), I heard it when XP was released (backwards compatibility was screwed...angry users were going to switch to Linux or OSX), and I'm hearing it all over again with Vista. As long as the major manufacturers are in Microsofts pocket, MS will continue to own the industry. The overwhelming majority of computer owners never buy their operating system, but instead simply run whatever comes loaded on their new computer. The average Joe doesn't care what kind of computer he owns as long as it will surf dirty pictures on the "internets", check his email, and help to balance his checkbook. When he walks into Circuit City, Best Buy, or WalMart to buy his next computer, he'll be looking at 20+ PC's, one or two Macs, and no Linux boxes. What do you think he's going to pick? Even your middling-savvy computer buyer, who statistically is probably going to buy his computer from Dell, will walk away with a Windows box. What version do you think they'll be buying next year?

The truly technically savvy are a minority in the PC world. Very few computer owners would even know how to ATTEMPT an OS install, and many of them have no interest in changing away from an OS they're familiar with. MacOSX and Linux, while good operating systems, still haven't developed their killer app to move people off of Windows.

BTW, one more detail about your "snowball"...it's not doing what you think it's doing. A quick look at the NetApp numbers shows that Microsofts marketshare has gone from 90.72% in August '06 to 90.55% today. That's a loss, but it's a negligible one. In the same period, the Mac has gone from 4.33% to 5.97%. Where did that impressive gain come from? Well, in that same period Linux, BSD, and a few other "alternative" OS's have gone from 4.95% to 3.49%. This has been discussed on Slashdot, Ars, and other tech boards a few times over the past year...the Mac is gaining its user base at the expense of the UNIX-derived OS's, not from Windows. Linux has been losing marketshare.

[Deja Q]

26. It uses more RAM, but the new features have grown on me...

The interface is much more professional looking, better laid out too.

When going back to XP, I missed the Sidebar and enhanced Start menu.

The 3D GUI effects are lovely.

I wish it had WinFS.

I wish they put out more downloadable extras for the Ultimate Edition; that's a small rip.

It runs about as fast as XP for the same apps.

It uses more RAM - yet the updated task manager/resource manager, while a terrific upgrade, will not show what is used by applications and what is used by the file cache. To me, that's a big minus.

While it uses more RAM, it intelligently knows when to release it for application usage.

A couple apps did not work when I upgraded to Vista, but the apps I replaced them with were far superior.

I started mapping the folder contents; over 4000 language files exist, encompassing every language supported -- why these couldn't be divvied up per language, or per the installation as it asks you for the language you use, I have no idea.

DreamScene is lovely, except it's not stable.

Activation stinks. Installing an updated video driver knocked out the activation code and I had to CALL Microsoft to get the machine reactivated. :wtf:

It COULD be better, and I bought it clearance from a store closing out (CompUSA), so I'm fine with the price. But all things considered, Home Premium is $100 less and apart from DreamScene and a couple other things I don't use, it is no different than Ultimate.

[eggman67]

28. Check this out

It uses more RAM - yet the updated task manager/resource manager, while a terrific upgrade, will not show what is used by applications and what is used by the file cache. To me, that's a big minus.

I agree with this. That said, in case you don't already know about this utility check it out. I find it indispensable:


http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Utilities/ProcessExplorer.mspx

[DS1]

27. Hit and Miss

[HughMoran]

32. I've had lots of issues with it

OTOH, it seems OK now, though I did get a couple of blue-screens-of-death last week.

It's a slow resource hog and MUST be run with 2 GIGs of memory - no exceptions.

[eggman67]

35. Totally untrue. I have 1 GB and it flys

There are other factors. Processor is one, Video Card is easily the biggest one.

That blanket statement about RAM is just untrue.

My WEI: Base score = 4.2

Component Details........................................................Subscore
Processor AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3400+ 2.41 GHz.......4.2
Memory (RAM) 1.00 GB..................................................4.3
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GS/XT................................5.9
Gaming graphics 511 MB Total available graphics memory.......4.9
Primary hard disk............................................................5.2
Windows Vista (TM) Ultimate

What are your WEI stats?

[HughMoran]

47. Perhaps the integrated video?

I am currently happily using 1.2GB of the 2GB after startup & running only IE.

Dozens of people on another forum found that they had to upgrade to 2GB to get decent performance. Glad it's working out for you - I did not need the video card since I don't do games on my laptop. If you must have a video card (with a lot of memory) + 1GB of RAM, that's still notable. A self-diagnosed reliability rating that was never above 5 until I upgraded the memory is now consistently above 9 on the same reliability scale. I'm glad your machine runs well and I learned something about how the video card may dramatically effect Vista performance. OTOH, my battery life is the worst I've ever seen with Vista and the video card would have made it even worse.

[Amonester]

39. Mine was really slow until I disabled all unnecessary animations...

...that come with it "by default" and, while I can't say it's really fast now, it is 'faster' enough for what I do with it.

Vista + Firefox + DU. :thumbsup:
Learning OOP & languages.
Assembly language (API).
And emails, of course.

I have no problems with that operating system.
No blue screens of death whatsoever.
I'm good at not making 'mistakes' :)
if using Vista is not a mistake
to begin with, of course...
:rofl:

[JeffR]

33. There's no reasonable explanation conceivable for an OS

that requires 2 gigs of RAM to run properly. None.

[eggman67]

46. I agree and contrary to what you've heard

Vista does NOT require 2GB of RAM to run properly.

[Drifter]

37. Vista is nothing more than ...

XP with shitty graphical interface changes. MS is several steps (more likely an entire floor) behind what the Mac has been doing for a while. It almost seems like they are getting desperate (and sloppy).

It is time to stop asking whether the next MS OS is worth upgrading to. If you even have to ask this question, then you are chasing the wrong product. If you want to stop this nonsense, then BUY A MAC. That is precisely what I did a few months ago, cold turkey. Best decision I have made since I bought a Hybrid car.

I have been using MS windows since it was version 2.0 (what a piece of shit that was). I was exposed to Macs early (ie 128K Mac up to Mac SE, etc.), but considered them toys. At the time it was true, as there was very little SW to take advantage of it.

Cheers
Drifter

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

38. I won't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

And if I have to buy a new computer and it ABSOLUTELY HAS TO have a Windows partition, I'll buy a OS-less one, or assemble one, and shop for a second-hand (NOT PIRATE!) copy of 2000 or XP. Fuck them.

[CK_John]

43. Vista has a classic mode. Try right click on Start button->properties should have an option. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. We wre forced into ultimate

and here are several observations

1.- If you run MS programs it behaves beutifully

2.- Once you start using third party software the headaches begin

So far, Poser 5 will not run, I had to buy a new version of my PDF creator (it will not install the driver of the 3.0 version)... macromedia's dreamweaver was a complete nightmare to install... my mappng software, well profantasy sort of behaves, while FM 8 was designed from the word go to work with it. Oh and Corel painter behaves well under it

On the other hand, the games (Star Wars was a tad troublesome) look beautiful...

I hope that covers it

(Oh and don't get me started with the printer installation, still having nightmares over it)