2 surprises of vista

[vista user 43]

1st surprise was that I never believed Microsoft was capable of making such
a horrible OS (vista) especially after making XP that was very good,
and especially in 2007.

but the second surprise, something I will never understand, is that I was
astonished to see that there were actually people who did not realize how
horrible vista really is, and not only that, but they show determination to
a fanatic degree & support this piece of trash! (vista)
Not only that, but they have the nerve to call people like me and others,
who clearly comprehend far more than they, stupid!

The vista fanboys give me the creeps... if people cant understand such
simple things... what can you say about other things in life?

Oh humanity is in grave danger then... those who have a brain, will
understand what I am talking about.


PS. vistaboys don't try using your brain at home and try to figure out what
I mean above.. you might burn up the last few neuron cells that are left
after vista degradation

 

[Saucy]

1st surprise was that I never believed Microsoft was capable of making
such a horrible OS (vista) especially after making XP that was very good,
and especially in 2007.

but the second surprise, something I will never understand, is that I was
astonished to see that there were actually people who did not realize how
horrible vista really is, and not only that, but they show determination
to a fanatic degree & support this piece of trash! (vista)
Not only that, but they have the nerve to call people like me and others,
who clearly comprehend far more than they, stupid!

The vista fanboys give me the creeps... if people cant understand such
simple things... what can you say about other things in life?

Oh humanity is in grave danger then... those who have a brain, will
understand what I am talking about.


PS. vistaboys don't try using your brain at home and try to figure out
what I mean above.. you might burn up the last few neuron cells that are
left after vista degradation

Please, XP was harangued as much or more than Vista when it came out. Same
old story. The only real problem [and it's not a problem] IMHO is that
people are confused about UAC to some extent e.g. why does it ask twice in
some cases. I might do a webpage.

Saucy

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

1st surprise was that I never believed Microsoft was capable of making
such a horrible OS (vista) especially after making XP that was very good,
and especially in 2007.

but the second surprise, something I will never understand, is that I was
astonished to see that there were actually people who did not realize how
horrible vista really is, and not only that, but they show determination
to a fanatic degree & support this piece of trash! (vista)
Not only that, but they have the nerve to call people like me and others,
who clearly comprehend far more than they, stupid!

The vista fanboys give me the creeps... if people cant understand such
simple things... what can you say about other things in life?

Oh humanity is in grave danger then... those who have a brain, will
understand what I am talking about.


PS. vistaboys don't try using your brain at home and try to figure out
what I mean above.. you might burn up the last few neuron cells that are
left after vista degradation

How long did you have Vista installed on your system?

 

[Bill Yanaire]

1) That you continue to bash Vista all day long.
2) That your parole officer allows you to use the computer.

 

[Frank]

1st surprise was that I never believed Microsoft was capable of making such
a horrible OS (vista)...

Guess what you idiot...they didn't!

especially after making XP that was very good,

and especially in 2007.

but the second surprise, something I will never understand, is that I was
astonished to see that there were actually people who did not realize how
horrible vista really is,

Wrong dogie breath...you're just too stupid and incompetent to use Vista.
Try etch-a-sketch...if you can afford one...hahaha...LOL!
Get a life you moron.
Frank

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

You need to read your own posts for a change, you even attack others
in this post.
It is you who regularly calls others stupid.
The others who successfully use Windows Vista.
It seems their success is incomprehensible to you and so you attack
them for your own failings.

"if people cant understand such simple things"
Windows Vista is not so complex, many use it and understand it.
It is you that seems to fail both of the above.
Windows Vista is apparently to complex for you.

And yet another typical post from you full of your usual attacks.

 

[Not Me]

How long did you have Vista installed on your system?

Mike Hall - MVP
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

It has been installed since the first Beta build. I keep it on one system
built specifically for Vista.
I still don't like it.

I bought a new Toshiba laptop (A315-S4527) last month with Vista Home
Premium preinstalled.
It is a core duo 1.8Ghz with 1GB RAM but ran like molasses, even after
removing all the factory 'enhancements' (promotional software).
It now has XP Pro and works so much better.
Finding all the drivers was a challenge, but once found, I created a disk
(much like the disk you would find with a new motherboard) so all the
drivers are in 1 place in case a reinstall is ever needed.

 

[john]

Please, XP was harangued as much or more than Vista when it came out.

....not by me or anyone else I know. XP by comparison was a joy - all my
hardware was detected and worked right out of the box, and all my existing
software ran - Vista.. not even close

 

[Very Frustrated]

I don't like Vista either. But then again I don't like the continual bloat
of this operating system. I've been using Microsoft OS since the first DOS
version and the basic features are just buried under more and more layers of
I'm here to help you.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

What has HP said when you contacted them about warranty support for
the two computers?
Have you exchanged the probably defective from manufacturer computer?

 

[Saucy]

1st surprise was that I never believed Microsoft was capable of making
such a horrible OS (vista) especially after making XP that was very good,
and especially in 2007.

but the second surprise, something I will never understand, is that I was
astonished to see that there were actually people who did not realize how
horrible vista really is, and not only that, but they show determination
to a fanatic degree & support this piece of trash! (vista)
Not only that, but they have the nerve to call people like me and others,
who clearly comprehend far more than they, stupid!

The vista fanboys give me the creeps... if people cant understand such
simple things... what can you say about other things in life?

Oh humanity is in grave danger then... those who have a brain, will
understand what I am talking about.


PS. vistaboys don't try using your brain at home and try to figure out
what I mean above.. you might burn up the last few neuron cells that are
left after vista degradation

Are you the one that claimed to be a Vista "expert" w/o even ever installing
and using it?

Saucy

 

[ray]

Guess what you idiot...they didn't!

especially after making XP that was very good,

Wrong dogie breath...you're just too stupid and incompetent to use Vista.
Try etch-a-sketch...if you can afford one...hahaha...LOL!
Get a life you moron.
Frank

I see. So now the answer is that it takes a degree in computer science to
make vista work - previously that was the argument you used about Linux.
Interesting logic.

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

It has been installed since the first Beta build. I keep it on one system
built specifically for Vista.
I still don't like it.

I bought a new Toshiba laptop (A315-S4527) last month with Vista Home
Premium preinstalled.
It is a core duo 1.8Ghz with 1GB RAM but ran like molasses, even after
removing all the factory 'enhancements' (promotional software).
It now has XP Pro and works so much better.
Finding all the drivers was a challenge, but once found, I created a disk
(much like the disk you would find with a new motherboard) so all the
drivers are in 1 place in case a reinstall is ever needed.

But you know that Vista runs better with 2gb installed, and that the
majority of current laptops are underpowered when compared to a similar
priced desktop machine. You know that the video card will take a chunk out
of the supplied RAM just as it does with the many desktop motherboards which
have integrated graphics. So you know that you are starting effectively with
only half as much memory as would have been installed in a better specified
desktop of five years ago. You know that the power management will be
defaulted to low CPU in order to get the claimed battery life.

Were you to compare Vista on your machine with XP on a machine released
around the year 2002, you would not notice that XP was any faster than Vista
is. Of course, that would not suit your purposes at all, would it!!

It may or may not have escaped your attention that Win 2000 ran better on a
high end XP machine than XP did. Are you surprised?. So why are you not
running Windows 2000 still? A driver problem? Microsoft don't do drivers, so
it is not their fault, and you can hardly expect Microsoft to choke Vista by
making it backward compatible with every piece of junk made of the last
seven years.

There were many users in 2002 who complained about XP being slow, and one
way to increase XP speed was to revert to classic look, which I and many
like me did. There were also many new users of XP who complained about
hardware and software.incompatibilities too.

I have noticed that some of the magazine tests on Vista are conducted on a
laptop. This is a smart move if they want to convince others that Vista is
slow as all hell, eh, because they first have to convince themselves
according to their prejudices.

The fact that YOU don't like Vista has no bearing on whether others will
like it, and denigrating Vista because YOU don't like it is no good reason
to mock or insult those who do like it.

Personally, having used Vista since early beta days, I find reverting to XP
akin to going back to the dark ages. It looks and feels clunky. In my
opinion, my opinion counts for more than yours especially where my personal
well being is concerned, and you should accept and respect that.

BUT YOU DON'T. You want everybody to think like you do, and from what I can
deduce from your writings, I wouldn't want to be like YOU. I am quite happy
being ME. I suspect that many others feel the same way as I do.

I don't come here to convince anybody of anything. I come here to try and
offer a bit of support to those who have chosen Vista, or have chosen to buy
hardware where Vista is essentially the only option at the point of sale.

Maybe you should try supporting people here instead of using the newsgroup
as a vehicle to peddle your own prejudices

 

[Saucy]

But you know that Vista runs better with 2gb installed, and that the
majority of current laptops are underpowered when compared to a similar
priced desktop machine. You know that the video card will take a chunk out
of the supplied RAM just as it does with the many desktop motherboards
which have integrated graphics. So you know that you are starting
effectively with only half as much memory as would have been installed in
a better specified desktop of five years ago. You know that the power
management will be defaulted to low CPU in order to get the claimed
battery life.

Were you to compare Vista on your machine with XP on a machine released
around the year 2002, you would not notice that XP was any faster than
Vista is. Of course, that would not suit your purposes at all, would it!!

It may or may not have escaped your attention that Win 2000 ran better on
a high end XP machine than XP did. Are you surprised?. So why are you not
running Windows 2000 still? A driver problem? Microsoft don't do drivers,
so it is not their fault, and you can hardly expect Microsoft to choke
Vista by making it backward compatible with every piece of junk made of
the last seven years.

There were many users in 2002 who complained about XP being slow, and one
way to increase XP speed was to revert to classic look, which I and many
like me did. There were also many new users of XP who complained about
hardware and software.incompatibilities too.

I have noticed that some of the magazine tests on Vista are conducted on a
laptop. This is a smart move if they want to convince others that Vista is
slow as all hell, eh, because they first have to convince themselves
according to their prejudices.

The fact that YOU don't like Vista has no bearing on whether others will
like it, and denigrating Vista because YOU don't like it is no good reason
to mock or insult those who do like it.

Personally, having used Vista since early beta days, I find reverting to
XP akin to going back to the dark ages. It looks and feels clunky. In my
opinion, my opinion counts for more than yours especially where my
personal well being is concerned, and you should accept and respect that.

BUT YOU DON'T. You want everybody to think like you do, and from what I
can deduce from your writings, I wouldn't want to be like YOU. I am quite
happy being ME. I suspect that many others feel the same way as I do.

I don't come here to convince anybody of anything. I come here to try and
offer a bit of support to those who have chosen Vista, or have chosen to
buy hardware where Vista is essentially the only option at the point of
sale.

Maybe you should try supporting people here instead of using the newsgroup
as a vehicle to peddle your own prejudices

'Not Me' just got pwned.

Saucy

 

[Frank]

I see. So now the answer is that it takes a degree in computer science to
make vista work

No...it just takes a functioning brain!

- previously that was the argument you used about Linux.

I never argue with linux.

Interesting logic.

Confused I'd say.
Frank

 

[the wharf rat]

But you know that Vista runs better with 2gb installed, and that the

Why the heck does Vista need 2GB of ram to run ?

Linux needs 256. Solaris needs 512. AIX needs 1GB. Z/OS needs
512MB (on a LAPTOP!). Great Ghu, I could run an Oracle server on 2GB...

 

[the wharf rat]

Linux needs 256. Solaris needs 512. AIX needs 1GB. Z/OS needs
512MB (on a LAPTOP!). Great Ghu, I could run an Oracle server on 2GB...

P.S. - I run OS/2 Warp in 16 and it'll install in 8

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

P.S. - I run OS/2 Warp in 16 and it'll install in 8

You quoted minimum OS RAM requirements. Vista will run in 512mb, but it
doesn't make for a particularly good experience anymore than what you
quoted.

There is the part too where integrated video shares RAM on the majority of
lower end x86 motherboards now, which is not the case with what you
mentioned.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

You are giving reason why you may not want to use Windows Vista.
If that is so, your question is largely irrelevant.

However the fact is Windows Vista doesn't need 2 GB RAM.
Anywhere from 512 MB RAM and up depending on the specific uses.
Most seem to need 1 GB RAM or more, but that is the user needs, not
the operating system needs.

Everyone needs to choose what best suits their needs and no single
operating system will probably ever fit everyone.

 

[David]

You quoted minimum OS RAM requirements. Vista will run in 512mb, but
it doesn't make for a particularly good experience anymore than what
you quoted.

LOL! the understatement of the year! Vista will CRAWL with 512.