Why Vista is great - and people need to stop looking for things...

[Marcos Kleine]

Vista would be great, or will be great, now is a headache, at least for me.
Microsoft Issues.

1-Windows Mail is horrible, full of bugs, email autofill does not work,
spell check to Portuguese is not available. Contacts are complicate to
manage and bugs with ghost messages that cannot be deleted.
2-Media Center does not work with my Tv Tuner. I tried Pinnacle, Lg....etc
etc etc.
3-If you install sound forge reboot will be a problem.

Companies Issues.
1-Only one Nvidia Driver works to me- 97.34. The last one was the worst i
ever tried.
2-M-audio is quiet about their drivers, no drivers to any soundcard. Absurd!
So i have problems with Tv Tuner, audio and Video, and the program i use all
the time, Windows Mail, is worst than outlook express.
I am not happy....

 

[Justin]

There's a difference between "pointing out shortcomings" and posting a
message in a NG stating "Vista Sucks". Which is what the few "knuckleheads"
I mentioned, do.

 

[Justin]

you've been
conditioned to accept 'good enough' as good as it gets.

If the "work" on Vista was complete then your little rant would be worth
something. No one said Vista was "done".

 

[Eric]

Your heard mentality duly noted. Followers get by, leaders lead. If
nobody pointed out shortcomings you'd still be running DOS at some
dopey command prompt.

Windows 3.1 rocks! Ha!

I remember the release day of Windows 95 and how we all said what a memory
hog that was.
We had to UPGRADE to 16 MB RAM just to run it!
Yes those early PCs thought 4 MB of RAM was a lot.

I suspect if you get the ideal system (Duo Core, 3 GB RAM, 1 GB video
RAM...) it'll run nicely, and in 15 years that system will look really
small.
"Wow, you ONLY had 3 GB RAM?"

 

[Adam Albright]

Can anyone explain to me why the user experiences seem to be so widely
different. You have people installing who have nothing but trouble and
you have people, like me, who don't have any trouble. Not to say I WON'T
have any, but as it goes so far, it's running like a champ! What is the
factor that makes the user experience go this way? Hardware? Software?
Id10T Error?

It isn't just user experience, it depends on your hardware and
software. I would wager that generally people that have few if any
problems probably more often then not have a plain Jane system with no
exotic hardware and mostly simplistic software. If you have some
unusal stuff hardware wise, disable or remove until AFTER Vista is up
and running ok.

As far as user awareness there is nothing inherently difficult about
installing a new version of Windows.

1. open the package
2. insert DVD
3. follow on screen prompts, agree to license
4. provide Product Key when asked
5. give a name to your PC, setup at least one user, admin. password
6. change time zone if needed
7. be patient

The last one I bet causes the most problems. People seeing nothing
happening for 30 seconds or so and they freak and start pushing
buttons on the keyboard or turn the computer off, and other dumb
things which the install process may or may not correctly recover
from.

I have a low tolerance for people that mock others that DO have
problems. Windows CAN install easily with no issues, then again it can
be a bitch to install even if you've installed other versions of
Windows hundreds of times before.

My first attempt to install Vista ended in a BSOD. Nothing I did, the
Vista Advisor lied and set a couple drivers it had no information on
wouldn't cause any problems. They did. So disabling these, the 2nd try
worked fine.

 

[Nemo MS MVXPshelluser]

Bill, Bill G, is that you?

 

[Adam Albright]

There's a difference between "pointing out shortcomings" and posting a
message in a NG stating "Vista Sucks". Which is what the few "knuckleheads"
I mentioned, do.

I guess you don't realize how much of a knucklehead a Microsoft
apologist comes across as. <wink>

 

[Nemo MS MVXPshelluser]

I'm pretty much in the same boat as you. I have a lot of clients actually
asking me to install Vista for them and although I could charge for the time, I
will NOT install it though. I may in a few months but right now I get far too
many complaints from the people who purchased new computers with the OS already
installed. I'm not saying Vista is a lost cause but right now it is just
isn't ready to be released. I think the boxed edition available at the store
is possibly a Beta 3 or at most RC1.



Can anyone explain to me why the user experiences seem to be so widely
different. You have people installing who have nothing but trouble and you have
people, like me, who don't have any trouble. Not to say I WON'T have any, but as
it goes so far, it's running like a champ! What is the factor that makes the
user experience go this way? Hardware? Software? Id10T Error?

The main factor IMHO is the OS. It causes hardware, software, and idiot error
problems.

"Top post...we don't want to have to read the same thing over and over for each
new bottom post."

 

[Adam Albright]

If the "work" on Vista was complete then your little rant would be worth
something. No one said Vista was "done".

Please inform us what you think RELEASED for sale means?

If you give Microsoft between $160 and $260 for a "upgrade", more if
your buy a full version, you expect more than a buggy beta version in
the box.

Come on, you can't be as dumb as you sound, can you?

Windows version 1.0 was released on November 20th, 1985. If you can do
simple math that means Windows has been around over 20 years. If work
isn't complete on it yet, when do you think it will be?

Most software is considered "mature" by the time it gets to its fifth
or sixth version. After that basically updates to keep up with
changing technology and adding eye candy and if lucky some new
features.

Lets count..

11/20/85 Windows 1.0
12/09/87 Windows 2.0

The rest here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_Windows

While one could argue that each new version of Windows was better then
the last (exclude WorkGroups or Me, PLEASE!) the problem many long
time users have noticed is bugs in earlier versions have a bad habit
of getting carried forward to the latest version, plus the bonus of
having new bugs in each new release. In one respect you hit the nail
right on the head. Vista isn't done, Windows is never done either.
There's always new bugs to find and fix. Been like than since 1985.
People will be having the same conversation in 2025 if Microsoft is
still around.

 

[Leythos]

Can anyone explain to me why the user experiences seem to be so widely
different. You have people installing who have nothing but trouble and
you have people, like me, who don't have any trouble. Not to say I WON'T
have any, but as it goes so far, it's running like a champ! What is the
factor that makes the user experience go this way? Hardware? Software?
Id10T Error?

Sure, and it's easy:

1) There are a gillion different pieces of hardware in computers

2) There are a gillion * gillion combinations of hardware in computers

3) The OS is built to a common denominator base of devices around an
expected set of standard supported devices.

4) There are many firmware levels for each computer part, BIOS,
Chipesets, NIC's, Video cards, CPU Stepping levels, CPU cache levels,
etc...

If you've been around for any length of time, where you moved from
Windows anything to anything else (windows) you would know that my
description is the norm, and not the exception. The new OS always
includes MORE and needs MORE to run, it's just a given fact of the way
MS has done things since the start.

I like vista, but, it's way to bloated and under preforming for machines
that are not maxed out or older than 1 year, and that's my OPINION. Yes,
I know there are exceptions, there always are, but, my experience with
Dell (between 0 and 2 years old, white box, high-end workstation
machines) is that Vista performs slower than XP on that same hardware.

If you keep asking things like "Id10T" I'll classify you as a zealot or
troll and not reply to you any more.

You limited experience does not make it the norm or the common
experience. Yes, there are trolls here trying to put down vista just
because it's a MS product, but I make a living selling MS solutions, and
do it by making the BEST solution for the client, not just selling them
the newest wiz-bang toys.

 

[Justin]

You need to check your facts buddy. Upgrade starts at $99. Don't be a
friggin' drama queen!

MS will continue to work on Vista as they continue to work on all their
software. The last time I checked OSX and Linux continue to be worked on as
well. OSX 10.4.1 - .2 - .3 - .4...what to you think those are? New games?
Something wasn't GOOD ENOUGH.

Yet another worthless troll that feels the need to exaggerate, lie and
spouts BS that isn't true.

Please inform us what you think RELEASED for sale means?
Come on, you can't be as dumb as you sound, can you?

Unfortunately you DO seem as dumb as you sound.

Vista works. Period. With the right hardware and the right drivers, it's
pretty damn solid. Do you have either? Probably not. Same deal with 98,
2000, XP.......

 

[Justin]

I have nothing to apologize for. I run Vista and it run very well on my
hardware. It seems a little research on my part paid off. Gee, go figure!

 

[Justin]

1GB of video ram!?!?!?!?

I don't any of that and Vista runs just fine.

 

[Justin]

Better hardware, not really available, we always purchase the top Intel
boards and CPU and RAM for machines, so in your limited experience
you've found something that works, while my larger experience base shows
that Vista is a resource hog.

Then you shouldn't be having THIS MUCH of an issue. You're obviously doing
something wrong! I have a few laptops that also run Vista just fine. Trust
me, the problem is you.

"The rest of the world doesn't..." then you say "Some do..."

Yeah, SOME.

Well, it's a fact that Vista uses more resources that XP, even MS can
tell you this.

Of course it does. However with Vista it's actually USING IT. If your
machine has 4GB of memory and 80% of the time that memory is FREE, what the
hell is the point? Vista uses more but the key word there is USES.

And it's another fact that many apps that run under XP
have problems running under Vista (but we expect that), and it's another
fact that many modern devices don't have vista drivers or have badly
implemented vista drivers - but we expect that.

But we expect that? Then what you are bitching about?

Ah, but you are mistaken. Your being lucky enough to have a machine that
runs Vista quickly is not the norm

Lucky enough? Hahahahaha. Unlike most idiot IT people I actually put
thought into building a machine. It sounds like you blindly buy up INTEL
only product and slap it all together. Tisk tisk tisk!

Look bud, bottom line. If you want to run Vista then you need Vista
compatible hardware and software. Something you obviously do not have.
Office 2007 runs FINE on Vista. However, seeing as how you seriously driver
issues I have no doubt that most anything wont run fro squat on your poorly
built machines.

Unless
the computer (and notice that I said purchased in the last year, P4
3.2Ghz - or Dual Core, 1GB+ RAM, 512MB Video as a typical machine) your
running has never run XP then you don't really know what the heck you
are talking about.

Unless the computer has never run XP??? WTF is that? The fact that it HAS
run both tell me exactly what I need to know.

My experience with many vista conversions, from a wiped drive, leaves me
to believe we should stick with XP until there is a requirement to
change to Vista, which will also mean a minimum of a Core 2 Duo CPU.

Minimum of Core 2 Duo??? HAHAHAHAHA. You truly are completely ignorant.
That comment alone makes you look like a JOKE! You fail. So I guess you
are going to FORCE your customers to upgrade ALL their hardware to at least
Core 2 Duo? I feel sorry for your customers! I bet you'll also "recommend"
Ultimate for all your business partners? Like I said, what a JOKE!

Non-Updated apps? What the heck are you talking about? MS Office 2003 is
not old, and office 2007 has only been out a very short time.

Why would you expect 2003 to work well? As already mentioned 2007 works
fine.

Stop taking it personally, it's been this way with every new OS that MS
has produced, each one is slower than the OS it replaces, only the
hardware catches up to make it faster.

Ok, so Vista is slower then Windows 3.x. Got it! Thanks for teaching me
something.

 

[Justin]

It's ok. They'll never get a life. It's up to us to bring whatever little
substance to their life we can

 

[Justin]

Can anyone explain to me why the user experiences seem to be so widely
different. You have people installing who have nothing but trouble and you
have people, like me, who don't have any trouble. Not to say I WON'T have
any, but as it goes so far, it's running like a champ! What is the factor
that makes the user experience go this way? Hardware? Software? Id10T
Error?

It's all IDIOT ERROR. These are people that THINK they're computer savvy
when in fact they don't know squat!

They upgraded with out first guaranteeing SUPPORT for their hardware. That
is something that must be done when you install a new OS.

They're people that THINK they can stroll down to CompUSA and buy a bunch of
pretty boxes then build a computer out of it and install whatever OS they
want. Well, you CAN but it's not smart or wise.

If buying new hardware is not an option then people simply need to wait for
more driver support.

 

[Leythos]

Like I said, what a JOKE!

You remind me of another Justin, just like him you're a troll, about 12
is my guess from the way you respond, and have to little experience to
know when you don't know something.

 

[Leythos]

It's all IDIOT ERROR. These are people that THINK they're computer savvy
when in fact they don't know squat!

They upgraded with out first guaranteeing SUPPORT for their hardware. That
is something that must be done when you install a new OS.

They're people that THINK they can stroll down to CompUSA and buy a bunch of
pretty boxes then build a computer out of it and install whatever OS they
want. Well, you CAN but it's not smart or wise.

If buying new hardware is not an option then people simply need to wait for
more driver support.

LOL - you are showing your ignorance again. The Vista ready kit (what
ever it was called when I downloaded it) verified that every device in
the systems I've used is 100% compatible, even though vista had trouble
with the wireless NIC.

So, now you tell me - if MS says that the machines are 100% compatible
then why would I expect anything less?

 

[Justin]

This coming from someone who thinks you have to have at least a Core 2 Duo
to run Vista.

They say ignorance is bliss!

 

[Justin]

..........There are no words for you. If that's what you THINK that app told
you about your computer then.....wow!

There is NO WAY I believe you are in IT yet alone running an IT business.

I can't believe that you are so thickheaded that you can't understand the
fact that you just have to wait for better drivers for your hardware. Your
hardware IS PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE for Vista (if that's what the app told
you). But that doesn't mean you have the drivers to back it up, YET.

If you seriously believe the Vista Upgrade Advisor was pre programmed to
understand ALL hardware and ALL software and ALL drivers and ALL firmware
then you truly have no clue. Another reason to feel sorry for your
customers.