Article>>>The Full Horror of Vista!!!!

T

Tiberius

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/05/14.9.shtml

A company that took its time, did everything right, and migrated to Vista
recounted the full horror of the experience. According to their account,
company employees found Vista to be slow, Explorer to be problematic, and
other quirks that left them less than satisfied.

The Transit company took the optimal path. They waited for the typical new
release bugs to be worked out. They purchased a new PC from a major vendor,
Lenovo, that had Vista pre-installed in order to avoid upgrade nightmares.
Finally, they kept the installed software on the computer at a minimum to
avoid complications.

The verdict? "...we've found nothing that works better than in Windows XP,
dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a functional
improvement, and several things that work at best intermittently and at
worst not at all. On the whole, we wish we'd never moved," Angus Kidman said
in a Blog report carried by ITWire.

The first observation was that Vista was "hideously slow" even on a new
Vista certified PC with twice the RAM and a faster processor. Boot times
were longer than the predecesor. The connection to the Linksys router
failed, and heroic support from Microsoft failed to resolve the problem.
"...if you can't get basic IP working in 2007, something pretty fundamental
is going wrong," Mr. Kidman wrote.

Another irritating problem related to using a local file as an HTML home
page. Mr. Kidman reported that this was hopeless effort with Vista,
"...since Internet Explorer insists on launching any page in a new window
because of a security restriction. As such, Vista has managed to convince us
to ditch Internet Explorer after nine years and switch to Firefox, which
doesn't indulge in such ridiculous behaviour, and seems to run faster as
well."

Finally, out of curiosity, Microsoft's Vista Upgrade Advisor was run. It
reported that the computer didn't have enough drive space, even though Vista
was preinstalled. And then it reported that the display and sound card
"weren't certified for Vista. The third thing it told us was that none of
the Lenovo utilities on the machine were Vista-ready. So much for
certification."

The bottom line was Microsoft should have worked harder to make Vista, "a
dog," a bigger advance over Windows XP/SP2.
 
T

Tiberius

Oh its a dog alright.... a big fat ugly lazy incompetent dog!

As many wise men have said over the centuries.. LONG LIVE XP!
The last OS of the golden age of microsoft (TM)
 
S

Sharon T

You got to be kidding me. Sure they did not make a fake story up? I disagree
with the below quoted. Not the experience I have with Vista, my PC runs very
smooth and fast.

"The first observation was that Vista was "hideously slow" even on a new
Vista certified PC with twice the RAM and a faster processor. Boot times
were longer than the predecessor."
 
T

Tiberius

sorry... its the same results I have seen on several machines....

Its not a lie.. Vista has many many many many many problems
and is as slow as a prehistoric giant sloth in hibernation.
 
D

Doris Day - MFB

Tiberius said:
Oh its a dog alright.... a big fat ugly lazy incompetent dog!
I take exception to that statement. I like dogs.

Love and Kisses,
Doris
 
D

Dustin Harper

Although I have read that others have had the major slowdowns and other
problems they mention, I have yet to experience it, and I've done several
dozen Vista installs on different hardware. I'm not denying they exist,
though. However, it is kind of weird that all these problems happen at the
same time for the author...

A few little quirks that are easily overcome. And yes, it is different than
XP on a lot of things. It's a lot better than making subtile differences and
having people bash it because it wasn't different enough! :)

--
Dustin Harper
(e-mail address removed)
http://www.vistarip.com

--
 
T

Tiberius

I love dogs too....

This one seems to be some freak genetic experiment to merge the dogs dna
with that of a snail a hippo
and implant a retarded jellyfish brain.

nothing else can explain its sluggyness, its bloatedness and its stupidity~!
 
T

Tiberius

they say that they have made differences but none that are beneficiary for
the user....

and I agree big time!!!

there were 1000000 things they could do to improve upon XP, and what did
they do instead?
they played around with the interface making stupid changes, installed
services that slow down the pc,
bloated it to smithereens, and made it full of compatibility problems, so
many that people
are starting to think linux or MACOS could be an alternative! lol

The word will get out : Companies keep away from anything Vista... as long
as possible.. its not fixable
even with service packs... keep away and perhaps MS will wise up and make
windows 2010 what
vista should have been.
 
F

Frank

Tiberius said:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/05/14.9.shtml

A company that took its time, did everything right, and migrated to Vista
recounted the full horror of the experience. According to their account,
company employees found Vista to be slow, Explorer to be problematic, and
other quirks that left them less than satisfied.

The Transit company took the optimal path. They waited for the typical new
release bugs to be worked out. They purchased a new PC from a major vendor,
Lenovo, that had Vista pre-installed in order to avoid upgrade nightmares.
Finally, they kept the installed software on the computer at a minimum to
avoid complications.

The verdict? "...we've found nothing that works better than in Windows XP,
dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a functional
improvement, and several things that work at best intermittently and at
worst not at all. On the whole, we wish we'd never moved," Angus Kidman said
in a Blog report carried by ITWire.

The first observation was that Vista was "hideously slow" even on a new
Vista certified PC with twice the RAM and a faster processor. Boot times
were longer than the predecesor. The connection to the Linksys router
failed, and heroic support from Microsoft failed to resolve the problem.
"...if you can't get basic IP working in 2007, something pretty fundamental
is going wrong," Mr. Kidman wrote.

Another irritating problem related to using a local file as an HTML home
page. Mr. Kidman reported that this was hopeless effort with Vista,
"...since Internet Explorer insists on launching any page in a new window
because of a security restriction. As such, Vista has managed to convince us
to ditch Internet Explorer after nine years and switch to Firefox, which
doesn't indulge in such ridiculous behaviour, and seems to run faster as
well."

Finally, out of curiosity, Microsoft's Vista Upgrade Advisor was run. It
reported that the computer didn't have enough drive space, even though Vista
was preinstalled. And then it reported that the display and sound card
"weren't certified for Vista. The third thing it told us was that none of
the Lenovo utilities on the machine were Vista-ready. So much for
certification."

The bottom line was Microsoft should have worked harder to make Vista, "a
dog," a bigger advance over Windows XP/SP2.


Only an idiot like you would bother to post an article from the
"macobserver", (an unbiased opinion right?) about one laptop computer
that came with Vista (we don't know which version of Vista) that one
company bought and was not impressed with its performance.
Of course, that's MS's fault right? Or did you ever in your little pea
brain stop to think it might be the vendors fault for not including
updated hardware?
Moron!
Frank
 
T

Tiberius

ok mr moron.. if you like it better from the original NON mac site here it
is:
this is the original location of the article, that other site just copied
it...

but YOU are biased enough to not want to believe it because you happened to
see its a mac site didn't you?
You think I am a mac user or lover just because I posted that?

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/12147/1101/1/0

Let the truth be heard you stupid vista blind follower troll!

It might save people from adopting vista before they find out how fully
horrible it is!
 
F

Frank

Tiberius wrote:

;;;;;;;;;clueless crap deleted-------------

You need real mental help if you actually think and believe that one
article about one laptop is enough for the rest of the business world to
make a business decision on which software to purchase.
OMG...you do believe it don't you!
Frank
 
T

Tiberius

frank it doesnt talk about 1 laptop.. it said "company migration"

This usually means multiple computers....

I believe that they are talking about multiple desktop computers and not one
laptop...

if it is only one laptop then of course you are right.. but I dont think the
person that wrote this
is talking about 1 laptop
 
A

Andreas Eibach

Tiberius said:
The verdict? "...we've found nothing that works better than in Windows
XP,

/me = Neutral.
dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a
functional improvement

Damn YES!
Can you imagine me as a Win2.0 starter in 199x-ish needs to use HELP in
Windows to find his way again because everything is somewhere freakin'
else than you'd expect? Gahhhhhh...
Not to mention the empty desktop:
Where the hell is my My Computer? Where's Network? Where's .. whatever?
Took me another helluva time to finally enable drive letters, not to
mention only the "personal folders" were visible at first. When do I
ever need those? :p Ah, there are my partitions! Hidden in 'Computer'.

I do not have to mention I had a damn hard time in my pre-vista times to
explain a remote Vista user on the phone to please navigate to his HD
tree. LOL. Hit'n miss...

Required me a clicking nightmare of more than 20 minutes until I had
Vista in a workable state.
(Unfortunately I had to reformat again because I idiot forgot to wait
for the final (!!!!) cleanup procedure in Acronis Disk Director (which I
had to use to gain some space, because this OS seriously requires SIX
POINT EIGHT gigabytes for the sys partition and I had "only" 4.5))

-Andreas
 
T

Tiberius

yes frank sorry.. you are correct.. they tested on one machine..

thank God they tested only one before migration!

their tests cannot be complete since it was on only one machine

You can feel ultimate joy that you are right about something for once in
your life :)

But that does not mean that he might not be right...

I know he is and that is because I have tested personaly vista and have
found that what he claims is totally correct.
 
X

xfile

I have no conclusion on performance - faster or slowness, as it indeed
varies on too many factors. Even on compatibility issue, I have no verdict
because limited samples available to myself, as compared to the unknown
numbers of hardware and software in the world.

[...]dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a
functional improvement, [...]

That actually is one of few major problems that I have with Vista.
 
M

Mike Hall MVP

The same was said about XP, to the point where some stayed with Win 2000..
now, with the release of Vista, some choose to forget earlier events because
it weakens their argument against Vista..


xfile said:
I have no conclusion on performance - faster or slowness, as it indeed
varies on too many factors. Even on compatibility issue, I have no verdict
because limited samples available to myself, as compared to the unknown
numbers of hardware and software in the world.

[...]dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a
functional improvement, [...]

That actually is one of few major problems that I have with Vista.



Tiberius said:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/05/14.9.shtml

A company that took its time, did everything right, and migrated to Vista
recounted the full horror of the experience. According to their account,
company employees found Vista to be slow, Explorer to be problematic, and
other quirks that left them less than satisfied.

The Transit company took the optimal path. They waited for the typical
new release bugs to be worked out. They purchased a new PC from a major
vendor, Lenovo, that had Vista pre-installed in order to avoid upgrade
nightmares. Finally, they kept the installed software on the computer at
a minimum to avoid complications.

The verdict? "...we've found nothing that works better than in Windows
XP, dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a
functional improvement, and several things that work at best
intermittently and at worst not at all. On the whole, we wish we'd never
moved," Angus Kidman said in a Blog report carried by ITWire.

The first observation was that Vista was "hideously slow" even on a new
Vista certified PC with twice the RAM and a faster processor. Boot times
were longer than the predecesor. The connection to the Linksys router
failed, and heroic support from Microsoft failed to resolve the problem.
"...if you can't get basic IP working in 2007, something pretty
fundamental is going wrong," Mr. Kidman wrote.

Another irritating problem related to using a local file as an HTML home
page. Mr. Kidman reported that this was hopeless effort with Vista,
"...since Internet Explorer insists on launching any page in a new window
because of a security restriction. As such, Vista has managed to convince
us to ditch Internet Explorer after nine years and switch to Firefox,
which doesn't indulge in such ridiculous behaviour, and seems to run
faster as well."

Finally, out of curiosity, Microsoft's Vista Upgrade Advisor was run. It
reported that the computer didn't have enough drive space, even though
Vista was preinstalled. And then it reported that the display and sound
card "weren't certified for Vista. The third thing it told us was that
none of the Lenovo utilities on the machine were Vista-ready. So much for
certification."

The bottom line was Microsoft should have worked harder to make Vista, "a
dog," a bigger advance over Windows XP/SP2.

--


Mike Hall
MS MVP Windows Shell/User
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/
 
S

Spocks Buddy

You should post your experience in a new thread
because it shows the insight of a person who sees vista for the first
time...

what good will it do? 2 things

1) it will make people thinking about getting vista aware of the problems
they might encounter
2) it will remind the vista fanatics in here who because they have used
vista since early betas
have forgoten all the problems someone who is new has. I have been using
vista since early betas too.. but I have not forgoten all the changes and
how stupid they are...

changes without good reason...
and no changes where there should have been changes!
that is vista for you!
 
F

Frank

Tiberius said:
yes frank sorry.. you are correct.. they tested on one machine..

thank God they tested only one before migration!

their tests cannot be complete since it was on only one machine

You can feel ultimate joy that you are right about something for once in
your life :)

But that does not mean that he might not be right...

I know he is and that is because I have tested personaly vista and have
found that what he claims is totally correct.
You don't even have a GED do you!
Frank
 
X

xfile

Yes, history is an indication but not always, as circumstances may not
exactly the same.

For one, I never had or said the same for XP or earlier versions and none of
around me had the same feelings.

I did do some researches (as my memory isn't that good) when I read a few
times about "some people said the same thing about previous Windows". Well,
it's true that some articles published at that time did reflect to the same
tone, but not all of them. Many did compliment XP and 2K but now
criticizing Vista.

So true, some naysayers may have been doing this all along, but not all
current naysayers are falling into the same group.

It's up to the company whether or not to open its mind.

This is the first MS OS that I have not wanted in my (our) systems since
Windows 1.x. Honestly speaking, it was not an easy and pleasant decision.




Mike Hall MVP said:
The same was said about XP, to the point where some stayed with Win 2000..
now, with the release of Vista, some choose to forget earlier events
because it weakens their argument against Vista..


xfile said:
I have no conclusion on performance - faster or slowness, as it indeed
varies on too many factors. Even on compatibility issue, I have no
verdict because limited samples available to myself, as compared to the
unknown numbers of hardware and software in the world.

[...]dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a
functional improvement, [...]

That actually is one of few major problems that I have with Vista.



Tiberius said:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/05/14.9.shtml

A company that took its time, did everything right, and migrated to
Vista recounted the full horror of the experience. According to their
account, company employees found Vista to be slow, Explorer to be
problematic, and other quirks that left them less than satisfied.

The Transit company took the optimal path. They waited for the typical
new release bugs to be worked out. They purchased a new PC from a major
vendor, Lenovo, that had Vista pre-installed in order to avoid upgrade
nightmares. Finally, they kept the installed software on the computer at
a minimum to avoid complications.

The verdict? "...we've found nothing that works better than in Windows
XP, dozens of things that are annoyingly different without being a
functional improvement, and several things that work at best
intermittently and at worst not at all. On the whole, we wish we'd never
moved," Angus Kidman said in a Blog report carried by ITWire.

The first observation was that Vista was "hideously slow" even on a new
Vista certified PC with twice the RAM and a faster processor. Boot times
were longer than the predecesor. The connection to the Linksys router
failed, and heroic support from Microsoft failed to resolve the problem.
"...if you can't get basic IP working in 2007, something pretty
fundamental is going wrong," Mr. Kidman wrote.

Another irritating problem related to using a local file as an HTML home
page. Mr. Kidman reported that this was hopeless effort with Vista,
"...since Internet Explorer insists on launching any page in a new
window because of a security restriction. As such, Vista has managed to
convince us to ditch Internet Explorer after nine years and switch to
Firefox, which doesn't indulge in such ridiculous behaviour, and seems
to run faster as well."

Finally, out of curiosity, Microsoft's Vista Upgrade Advisor was run. It
reported that the computer didn't have enough drive space, even though
Vista was preinstalled. And then it reported that the display and sound
card "weren't certified for Vista. The third thing it told us was that
none of the Lenovo utilities on the machine were Vista-ready. So much
for certification."

The bottom line was Microsoft should have worked harder to make Vista,
"a dog," a bigger advance over Windows XP/SP2.

--


Mike Hall
MS MVP Windows Shell/User
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/
 
J

Julie Smith

I'm sorry, I didn't realise that your machines were the ONLY ones that
mattered... get lost troll.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top