Why does it seem worse with Vista?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ceed
  • Start date Start date
C

ceed

Hi,

I'm a geezer who remember the noise around tons of Microsoft releases
(3.1, 95, Me, 2000, XP and Vista). I think OS's are fun so I just
can't help myself, I just have to check 'em out early. I did the same
thing with Vista and found a rock solid improved foundation with a lot
fluff on top which looks good but doesn't always work well. I have
taken care of those things and now Vista is working well for me. I
sometimes wonder if some of this has to do with my choice of hardware?
I have been purchasing computers from the same manufacturer forever
and have had very little hardware related trouble. The little I have
had has been fixed in a timely efficient manner. Maybe all this noise
around major OS updates also has to do with that the new OS versions
have to run on hardware that may not have been perfect in the first
place?

Anyhow, Vista has caused more noise than any of the previous Windows
updates I can remember. And what's new is that it doesn't stop. Now
nine months after it was thrown at us people haven't stopped griping
about it. Very recently I found this piece on Slahsdot:

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/08/18/1512243.shtml

Pretty heavy hitting criticism from a pretty prominent member of the
press! And again, I do not understand what the problem really is. I
can understand that people who doesn't know much about computers can
find UAC quite annoying. But on the other hand, if you are new to
computers you may think UAC is the way it's supposed to be, just like
Wndows users think viruses is a natural part of an OS's existence
somewhat like the flu and other infections are a part of our lives.
But when people who has been around computers and OS's for years are
still griping after 9 months it's pretty bad. I remember missing
Windows 2000 when I first got XP, but after about three months my
notes shows me that I was at happy with the upgrade. One the Linux
distro's I use it normally takes a little less time for me to feel at
home than it does on Windows, but that's probably because the major
upgrades aren't as far apart.

Oh well, I am so glad I Vista is working for me because it's the best
looking Windows ever! No one can argue that. And they made it look
great without "OSXifying" it too much. It has an identity of it's
own.

If I now just cold get my "Up" button back in Windows Explorer, and
people wold stop telling me I do not need it I would be perfectly
happy!

........Okay, do not *need* that "up" button, but i *want* it! I guess
I'm pretty lucky since that's my biggest Vista problem right now? Oh,
not entirely true: There's a utility I have been using so much that
it's become a part of all my Windows machines regardless. It's called
"Unlocker" and takes care of all those files that for some reason or
another is locked when you try to delete them. This has been a problem
in Windows since the beginning of time but "Unlocker" deals with it
wonderfully, but is not available on Vista yet (you can tweak it to
somewhat work on Vista by messing with UAC...again!).

Okay, so please try and explain to me what's so bad about this Windows
upgrade, because I do not get it. I just don't.


//ceed
 
Hi,

I'm a geezer who remember the noise around tons of Microsoft releases
(3.1, 95, Me, 2000, XP and Vista). I think OS's are fun so I just
can't help myself, I just have to check 'em out early. I did the same
thing with Vista and found a rock solid improved foundation with a lot
fluff on top which looks good but doesn't always work well. I have
taken care of those things and now Vista is working well for me. I
sometimes wonder if some of this has to do with my choice of hardware?
I have been purchasing computers from the same manufacturer forever
and have had very little hardware related trouble. The little I have
had has been fixed in a timely efficient manner. Maybe all this noise
around major OS updates also has to do with that the new OS versions
have to run on hardware that may not have been perfect in the first
place?

Anyhow, Vista has caused more noise than any of the previous Windows
updates I can remember. And what's new is that it doesn't stop. Now
nine months after it was thrown at us people haven't stopped griping
about it. Very recently I found this piece on Slahsdot:

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/08/18/1512243.shtml

Pretty heavy hitting criticism from a pretty prominent member of the
press! And again, I do not understand what the problem really is. I
can understand that people who doesn't know much about computers can
find UAC quite annoying. But on the other hand, if you are new to
computers you may think UAC is the way it's supposed to be, just like
Wndows users think viruses is a natural part of an OS's existence
somewhat like the flu and other infections are a part of our lives.
But when people who has been around computers and OS's for years are
still griping after 9 months it's pretty bad. I remember missing
Windows 2000 when I first got XP, but after about three months my
notes shows me that I was at happy with the upgrade. One the Linux
distro's I use it normally takes a little less time for me to feel at
home than it does on Windows, but that's probably because the major
upgrades aren't as far apart.

Oh well, I am so glad I Vista is working for me because it's the best
looking Windows ever! No one can argue that. And they made it look
great without "OSXifying" it too much. It has an identity of it's
own.

If I now just cold get my "Up" button back in Windows Explorer, and
people wold stop telling me I do not need it I would be perfectly
happy!

.......Okay, do not *need* that "up" button, but i *want* it! I guess
I'm pretty lucky since that's my biggest Vista problem right now? Oh,
not entirely true: There's a utility I have been using so much that
it's become a part of all my Windows machines regardless. It's called
"Unlocker" and takes care of all those files that for some reason or
another is locked when you try to delete them. This has been a problem
in Windows since the beginning of time but "Unlocker" deals with it
wonderfully, but is not available on Vista yet (you can tweak it to
somewhat work on Vista by messing with UAC...again!).

Okay, so please try and explain to me what's so bad about this Windows
upgrade, because I do not get it. I just don't.


//ceed
Click to expand...

What's wrong with Vista?

The same thing that's been wrong with every release of Windows going
back to the beginning over twenty years ago. It gets pushed out the
door not ready, not fully tested with Microsoft expecting the public
at large to be their unpaid beta testers so the boys of Redmond can
put together SP1 and nine months or so after the initial release make
the second release something closer to what the original release
should have been.

The public has been conditioned to accept this is normal. Damn are
people ever stupid!
 
Controversy creates increased readship which translates
into increasing advertizing revenues. Read the following
which illustrates how a Windows Vista critic's published
article was completely debunked with real world testing.

Gutmann: "I'm going to ignore" questions about Vista FUD
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

----------------------------------------------------------------------

:

Hi,

I'm a geezer who remember the noise around tons of Microsoft releases
(3.1, 95, Me, 2000, XP and Vista). I think OS's are fun so I just
can't help myself, I just have to check 'em out early. I did the same
thing with Vista and found a rock solid improved foundation with a lot
fluff on top which looks good but doesn't always work well. I have
taken care of those things and now Vista is working well for me. I
sometimes wonder if some of this has to do with my choice of hardware?
I have been purchasing computers from the same manufacturer forever
and have had very little hardware related trouble. The little I have
had has been fixed in a timely efficient manner. Maybe all this noise
around major OS updates also has to do with that the new OS versions
have to run on hardware that may not have been perfect in the first
place?

Anyhow, Vista has caused more noise than any of the previous Windows
updates I can remember. And what's new is that it doesn't stop. Now
nine months after it was thrown at us people haven't stopped griping
about it. Very recently I found this piece on Slahsdot:

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/08/18/1512243.shtml

Pretty heavy hitting criticism from a pretty prominent member of the
press! And again, I do not understand what the problem really is. I
can understand that people who doesn't know much about computers can
find UAC quite annoying. But on the other hand, if you are new to
computers you may think UAC is the way it's supposed to be, just like
Wndows users think viruses is a natural part of an OS's existence
somewhat like the flu and other infections are a part of our lives.
But when people who has been around computers and OS's for years are
still griping after 9 months it's pretty bad. I remember missing
Windows 2000 when I first got XP, but after about three months my
notes shows me that I was at happy with the upgrade. One the Linux
distro's I use it normally takes a little less time for me to feel at
home than it does on Windows, but that's probably because the major
upgrades aren't as far apart.

Oh well, I am so glad I Vista is working for me because it's the best
looking Windows ever! No one can argue that. And they made it look
great without "OSXifying" it too much. It has an identity of it's
own.

If I now just cold get my "Up" button back in Windows Explorer, and
people wold stop telling me I do not need it I would be perfectly
happy!

........Okay, do not *need* that "up" button, but i *want* it! I guess
I'm pretty lucky since that's my biggest Vista problem right now? Oh,
not entirely true: There's a utility I have been using so much that
it's become a part of all my Windows machines regardless. It's called
"Unlocker" and takes care of all those files that for some reason or
another is locked when you try to delete them. This has been a problem
in Windows since the beginning of time but "Unlocker" deals with it
wonderfully, but is not available on Vista yet (you can tweak it to
somewhat work on Vista by messing with UAC...again!).

Okay, so please try and explain to me what's so bad about this Windows
upgrade, because I do not get it. I just don't.


//ceed
 
There's nothing wrong with Vista that isn't inherently wrong with computers,
which is a plethora of hardware configurations combined with multitudes of
individuals operating or misoperating the system. No OS will make everyone
happy. And no OS manufacturer can predict every combination of programs,
toolbars, drivers, hardware, etc... that individuals will install and
misconfigure.
For me, Vista has been flawless.
For others, not so.
 
If you were not on the bridge that collapsed in Minnesota then what's the
big deal?
Vista is time by your wristwatch slower for all disk access operations than
XP on the same machine.
The UAC does not add to security and slows disk operations further.
The structure of the UAC makes a hash of the supposed Administrator/user
privilege structure of Vista.
Streaming multimedia is problematic for many users, even with the WMP.
Networking with XP units, especially wireless, is often impossible.
Incompatibility with many programs, especially multimedia and CD/authoring.
Many Vista drivers are not as functional as XP equivalents. Some work on
some Vista machines but not all and there is little manufacturer interest in
resolving problems.
Vista is too slow for many hi end games, particularly an issue as DX10 is
Vista only.
Visa has an unstable color management structure: the frigging UAC unloads
color management info from the video driver, making Vista unreliable for
high end graphics.
Shall I go on?
 
ceed said:
snip<
.......Okay, do not *need* that "up" button, but i *want* it! I guess
I'm pretty lucky since that's my biggest Vista problem right now? Oh,
not entirely true: There's a utility I have been using so much that
it's become a part of all my Windows machines regardless. It's called
"Unlocker" and takes care of all those files that for some reason or
another is locked when you try to delete them. This has been a problem
in Windows since the beginning of time but "Unlocker" deals with it
wonderfully, but is not available on Vista yet (you can tweak it to
somewhat work on Vista by messing with UAC...again!).
snip<
Click to expand...
===============================
Are you using the current version 1.8.5
of Unlocker? It's compatible with Vista:

Unlocker
http://ccollomb.free.fr/unlocker/

And...just wondering...have you considered
disabling UAC?

--

John Inzer
MS Picture It! -
Digital Image MVP

Digital Image
Highlights and FAQs
http://tinyurl.com/aczzp

Notice
This is not tech support
I am a volunteer

Solutions that work for
me may not work for you

Proceed at your own risk
 
MS has always needed early adopters to work the bugs out of new stuff.
That helps them to move things out of alpha stage into beta territory
where more people will be fooled into trusting it.

This time they just messed up more than normal and put out pre-pre-alpha
to make their loyal customers to iron out the nasties. It only took them 6
years to do it, too. The thing they didn't bank on was their customers
aren't willing to spend even more money and time on poorer products than
they became accustomed to being screwed with before.

Dell started selling XP machines again. I don't know the specifics about
who can buy them and on which models. But their business customers won't
buy Vista.

Acer's CEO (the number 4 PC maker) called Vista a "disappointment" to the
industry and to customers. He probably chose that word only because
stronger language would have gotten him sued.

Vista is not a disappointment. It's far, far worse. I'd say it's a joke,
but jokes usually have punchlines.

The fact that it seemingly works for a handful of people is irrelevant.
Anything can be made to work for the odd person here or there. Getting it
to work for average users is the key. You can't do that if everybody is
forced to buy all new hardware just to get it to work. Users wanting to
upgrade to get features sure aren't seeing any and they're losing a lot in
the process: machines not hefty enough (not even many bought last years),
lack of drivers, software that doesn't work, software that worked and
stopped working for no apparent reason, nothing new on the low-end product
and the high-end product priced out of range of a lot of people, and so
on.

Just look at any Vista group on usenet and compare it to any XP group of a
similar category. Vista has a tiny user base compared to XP. But the
numbers of postings to the Vista groups is a mountain to XP's molehill.

Vista is making ME look pretty stable and satisfying right about now. You
remember ME, right? The OS that was orphaned almost as soon as it was put
on the streets because it was so awful MS didn't even want to deal with
it?

I moved away from Vista because it was awful. I made the mistake of
upgrading over XP. That was a sorry mistake on my part, one that will
never be repeated. I won't go back. XP has a limited support cycle itself.
So I'm in the process of moving everything to linux. Billy and Stevie can
have the pile of manure they've turned Windows into!
 
ceed said:
Pretty heavy hitting criticism from a pretty prominent member of the
press!
Click to expand...

Slashdot are known Microsoft haters so the source is not credible. They are
not objective when it comes to Microsoft.
 
John said:
===============================
Are you using the current version 1.8.5
of Unlocker? It's compatible with Vista:

Unlocker
http://ccollomb.free.fr/unlocker/

And...just wondering...have you considered
disabling UAC?
Click to expand...

I have disabled UAC using this excellent tweaker:

http://xenomorph.net/?page_id=336

Did a fine job (and has some other safe tweaks in there as well).

And you are right current Unlocker is compatible with Vista. However, I
would like to see a version that could run on stock Vista without
having the user to mess with anything.
 
yep about as stupid as a self proclaimed computer professional who upgrades its computers and get screwed up because it did not do its homework, but expects microsoft to do all the hand holding for its screw ups.

WHINE,WHINE,WHINE.

same old story day after day.,



(e-mail address removed)



Hi,

I'm a geezer who remember the noise around tons of Microsoft releases
(3.1, 95, Me, 2000, XP and Vista). I think OS's are fun so I just
can't help myself, I just have to check 'em out early. I did the same
thing with Vista and found a rock solid improved foundation with a lot
fluff on top which looks good but doesn't always work well. I have
taken care of those things and now Vista is working well for me. I
sometimes wonder if some of this has to do with my choice of hardware?
I have been purchasing computers from the same manufacturer forever
and have had very little hardware related trouble. The little I have
had has been fixed in a timely efficient manner. Maybe all this noise
around major OS updates also has to do with that the new OS versions
have to run on hardware that may not have been perfect in the first
place?

Anyhow, Vista has caused more noise than any of the previous Windows
updates I can remember. And what's new is that it doesn't stop. Now
nine months after it was thrown at us people haven't stopped griping
about it. Very recently I found this piece on Slahsdot:

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/08/18/1512243.shtml

Pretty heavy hitting criticism from a pretty prominent member of the
press! And again, I do not understand what the problem really is. I
can understand that people who doesn't know much about computers can
find UAC quite annoying. But on the other hand, if you are new to
computers you may think UAC is the way it's supposed to be, just like
Wndows users think viruses is a natural part of an OS's existence
somewhat like the flu and other infections are a part of our lives.
But when people who has been around computers and OS's for years are
still griping after 9 months it's pretty bad. I remember missing
Windows 2000 when I first got XP, but after about three months my
notes shows me that I was at happy with the upgrade. One the Linux
distro's I use it normally takes a little less time for me to feel at
home than it does on Windows, but that's probably because the major
upgrades aren't as far apart.

Oh well, I am so glad I Vista is working for me because it's the best
looking Windows ever! No one can argue that. And they made it look
great without "OSXifying" it too much. It has an identity of it's
own.

If I now just cold get my "Up" button back in Windows Explorer, and
people wold stop telling me I do not need it I would be perfectly
happy!

.......Okay, do not *need* that "up" button, but i *want* it! I guess
I'm pretty lucky since that's my biggest Vista problem right now? Oh,
not entirely true: There's a utility I have been using so much that
it's become a part of all my Windows machines regardless. It's called
"Unlocker" and takes care of all those files that for some reason or
another is locked when you try to delete them. This has been a problem
in Windows since the beginning of time but "Unlocker" deals with it
wonderfully, but is not available on Vista yet (you can tweak it to
somewhat work on Vista by messing with UAC...again!).

Okay, so please try and explain to me what's so bad about this Windows
upgrade, because I do not get it. I just don't.


//ceed
Click to expand...

What's wrong with Vista?

The same thing that's been wrong with every release of Windows going
back to the beginning over twenty years ago. It gets pushed out the
door not ready, not fully tested with Microsoft expecting the public
at large to be their unpaid beta testers so the boys of Redmond can
put together SP1 and nine months or so after the initial release make
the second release something closer to what the original release
should have been.

The public has been conditioned to accept this is normal. Damn are
people ever stupid!
 
Duplex said:
I moved away from Vista because it was awful. I made the mistake of
upgrading over XP. That was a sorry mistake on my part, one that will
never be repeated.
Click to expand...

If you made that mistake and you are a noob and it discredits your post
entirely.
 
I'm also an old school windows guy, started out in the 3.1 days. I've seen
it all when it comes to MS OSs.

Vista still has it's problems, drivers are not fully up to speed (thanks
Nvidia !), a lot of hardware does not work and tons of older software does
not work. Overall perfomance is slower than XP and a lot of people have
problems with it all. Who actually expects a 5 year old scanner or a 4 year
old discontuned piece of software to acutally work forever ??? (I did get my
4 year old scanner working under vista though)

I use Vista and over all like it but, extract a zip file and it takes 30
seconds, when winrar can do it in 1/2 a second ? Transfer a 5mb file from
one drive to another, and it takes over a min, when in XP it would take less
than 5 seconds ?

As any new OS, and I remember clearly from XP days, every new OS, when it
comes to the scall that Microsoft sells, will not work with everything and
still have it's issues. XP was really bad for about 3-6 months after it came
out, nothing worked, crashes, and the same kind of stuff in the newsgroups
and websites. When SP1 came out, it really started to come from "junk" to
one of the best OS's that MS ever made.

I really think once service pack 1 comes out (and the fix for the service
pack), Vista will start getting better. As now is more of a
pay-to-beta-test. Tons of beta testers for a new OS do not have every piece
of hardware or every version of software, so, it's not expected to work.

Also, you read here and out of the 500-1000 people here are having problems,
the other 100,000 people who are not having problems, you never hear from.
Isn't that the way it always is ?

It's got it's problems but, once they are worked out, it's going to be a
very solid OS, that will grow to be better than XP, in time.....

Just my 0.02....
 
Okay, so please try and explain to me what's so bad about this Windows
upgrade, because I do not get it. I just don't.


//ceed
Click to expand...

My Vista experience has been much like yours. Pretty much trouble free.
Vista has been rock solid here. I guess the heaviest stuff I've done is
video editing with Movie Maker, but no problems there. My biggest complaint
with Vista has been the file copying snafu. Supposedly SP1 addresses that
issue. Time will tell.

I think the main issue has been the lack of 3rd party drivers and app
updates. Also, while some have upgraded without issue, I think clean
installs ensure a more stable system than upgrades. (And that's what I've
always felt... W2K to XP? Clean install. XP to Vista? Clean install. I think
most folks would agree with the clean install gambit.) And... I think OEM's
shipped PC's with drivers and crapware that was not fully vetted with Vista.
I won't delve into the politics involved in that situation. I'm sure you can
find arguements that blame MS and the other side that would blame vendors. I
subscribe to the latter group.

I just updated my ATI Multimedia Center software, running on XP MCE, to the
latest revision. The first time I attempted to change channels on the TV
app, it blew up. Do I blame that on XP? Uh, no?

Lang
 

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

Similar Threads

disk thrashing in Vista - why 1
LCD monitor worse with Vista than XP 12
IPhone sound quality gets worse each generation 5
Windows Vista, bad rep 2
Vista does not seem to completely log in ... (??) 2
Vista is about 1000 times worse than XP 44
Vista;l Windows Mail 2
CPU upgrade = Worse performance? 9

Back
Top