Vista

Simple, Vista is gay.

Can someone give me a legitimate reason why Vista is hated so much?

Its unstable, Its harder to use, its has serious compatability issues, It has less tech support, and its own features causes instability in its own software such as WLAN search which can cause game breaking lag spikes every 60 seconds.

It's GIU (or whatever) makes it slower than it should be, and that it requires more RAM than any OS should ever require.

Originally Posted by Celvantis

Its unstable

While I agree, not as much as people say

Originally Posted by Celvantis

Its harder to use

Personal anecdote

Originally Posted by Celvantis

its has serious compatability issues

Only the 64bit version...

Originally Posted by Celvantis

It has less tech support

Basing on what?

Originally Posted by Celvantis

and its own features causes instability in its own software such as WLAN search which can cause game breaking lag spikes every 60 seconds.

MUCH EASIER TO DISABLE THAN IN XP.

Originally Posted by ZeldaMaster#1#1

It's GIU (or whatever) makes it slower than it should be, and that it requires more RAM than any OS should ever require.

o_o? Both Sabayon and OS X eat more RAM, afaik.

Originally Posted by Danger

o_o? Both Sabayon and OS X eat more RAM, afaik.

"128 MB RAM (memory) or more for Mac OS X 10.3.9 or earlier." Not sure if that's right or not. And Sabayon requires .5GB. Vista's minimum requirements are 2GB to run at it's best.

Vista was a solution in search of a problem. Many Vista users claim, "It's not that bad. It works really well." OK, but what did Vista give us? Why did we need it? If I am running Windows XP, why should I shell out $100+ for an upgrade? There is no good reason. If Vista came with your computer, whatever. You really cannot control that. However, I really do question the sanity of anyone who explicitly purchased Vista off the shelf.

Vista would not have suffered so much public scrutiny if Microsoft had not had marketed the tar out of it. "The wow starts now." Everything that Microsoft advertised as an amazing feature in Vista could be done (faster, too) in XP.

XP was really old. There are definitely things in XP that could be drastically improved in an update, but Vista just missed the mark. It was built more to appease Hollywood and its obsession with DRM. Very little customer meaningful input went into it. That is where Windows 7 succeeded: it had a public beta, and the developers actually incorporated changes based on user requests.

The fact that Windows 7 is out already is proof of how little the world needed Vista. Windows 7 is fantastic. I've had the final version for several weeks (computer science student program). Windows 7 is everything that Vista should have been.

I've been using Vista for about a year now since I received Ultimate as a gift. Frankly I've been hard-pressed to find any of the issues I've heard people complaining about, though I jumped on board post-SP1.

Also, Win7 = Vista Reloaded. Go buy your Windows "Mojave," geniuses.

Originally Posted by F3

I've been using Vista for about a year now since I received Ultimate as a gift. Frankly I've been hard-pressed to find any of the issues I've heard people complaining about, though I jumped on board post-SP1.

Also, Win7 = Vista Reloaded. Go buy your Windows "Mojave," geniuses.

SP1 indeed made a big difference. It brought Vista from ridiculous to tolerable. Vista is certainly usable, but it still does not bring $100+ of worthwhile features to the table. You're lucky to have it as a gift.

And no, Windows 7 is not "Vista Reloaded". They have a similar core, but technical details of memory management are much different. Windows 7's MM is much lighter and more intelligent than Vista's MM is. Plus, the user interface is way better in 7.

Originally Posted by ZeldaMaster#1#1

"128 MB RAM (memory) or more for Mac OS X 10.3.9 or earlier."

10.3.9 is far from the latest version.

Originally Posted by ZeldaMaster#1#1

And Sabayon requires .5GB.

Not with all bells and whistles enabled. It runs like syrup on my laptop with 768 mb RAM.

Originally Posted by ZeldaMaster#1#1

Vista's minimum requirements are 2GB to run at it's best.

Yeah, they call that recommended requirements. Minimum is 512 (for home basic) and 1024 (for Premium, Business, and Ultimate)

Originally Posted by Danger

10.3.9 is far from the latest version.

Not with all bells and whistles enabled. It runs like syrup on my laptop with 768 mb RAM.

Yeah, they call that recommended requirements. Minimum is 512 (for home basic) and 1024 (for Premium, Business, and Ultimate)

Ah. Thought so.

Home Basic ran slower than it should on 1.5GB. I had even disabled a ton of useless stuff/services to obtain a higher speed.

Originally Posted by TheBuzzSaw

SP1 indeed made a big difference. It brought Vista from ridiculous to tolerable. Vista is certainly usable, but it still does not bring $100+ of worthwhile features to the table. You're lucky to have it as a gift.

And no, Windows 7 is not "Vista Reloaded". They have a similar core, but technical details of memory management are much different. Windows 7's MM is much lighter and more intelligent than Vista's MM is. Plus, the user interface is way better in 7.

This is indeed a possible main reason. I see that you shouldn't get Vista if upgrading from XP —but you should get the much better 7 OS. 7 is somewhat like Vista, but it costs the same, so you might as well get the better deal.

Originally Posted by ZeldaMaster#1#1

Ah. Thought so.

Home Basic ran slower than it should on 1.5GB. I had even disabled a ton of useless stuff/services to obtain a higher speed.

Alas, there's more than RAM involved. RAM should only affect if you get near the point it starts to page swap.

Originally Posted by ZeldaMaster#1#1

This is indeed a possible main reason. I see that you shouldn't get Vista if upgrading from XP —but you should get the much better 7 OS. 7 is somewhat like Vista, but it costs the same, so you might as well get the better deal.

I agree and haven't let Vista touch any of my computers.

Originally Posted by Danger

Alas, there's more than RAM involved. RAM should only affect if you get near the point it starts to page swap.

I know. I had tried anything I could find on the internet that I saw as safe, and getting more RAM (I went from .5, to 1.5GB). I tried disabling useless services, TuneUp Utilities, etc.

I agree and haven't let Vista touch any of my computers.[/QUOTE]

My family unfortunately has two laptops with Vista, and I got this desktop switched as to avoid any further frustration.

People get a little too worked up about physical memory usage I think. I guess they think the more free memory there is the faster things will 'go,' but that doesn't really make sense at all.

Like Danger said, it's a problem if you have to start spilling over to the swap file. Otherwise, RAM in use is a good thing. You don't pay for 4GB so you can sit around and admire how only half of it is ever used.

Originally Posted by TheBuzzSaw

And no, Windows 7 is not "Vista Reloaded". They have a similar core, but technical details of memory management are much different. Windows 7's MM is much lighter and more intelligent than Vista's MM is.

I'd be curious to know the details behind this since memory has never been an issue for me on Vista.

I bought a laptop a week ago and it has vista on it. I would have gotten xp, but getting vista got me a free upgrade to windows 7. Well so far I went into this vista with a lot of doubts, and it hasn't been that bad thus far. Of course that will all be moot when my windows 7 ships.

"Vista sucks"
"It's not that bad"
et cetera.

Originally Posted by Celvantis

Its unstable

Have you ever used Vista? I have had far less crashes (actually only 1) than on an xp machine in the 2.5 years I have been using it. I have it installed on half the computers at work with all the same programs installed and the vista machines come up with less issues than the xp machines (of course the xp machines are older and slower)

Its harder to use

I don't find it so. Once UAC is disabled (Yes UAC was a waste, but it's easily disabled) everything is easy.

its has serious compatability issues

The programs that don't work are extremely few and far between. In fact the only thing I had a problem getting to work was an old printer that I had to go to the japanese panasonic website and download a driver for (So this did start working).

It has less tech support

What does this mean?


Vista got a bad rep in the beginning because of bad drivers, then the bad-hype grew from there. People who have never used Vista spread the hate. I haven't heard a valid reason for anyone disliking Vista.

If you use your computer for nothing but web browsers and word processors, of course you're not going to run into problems.

Originally Posted by Glutexo

Can someone give me a legitimate reason why Vista is hated so much?

it had a rough launch due to third parties mucking up on drivers and support and Apple spend millions of dollars on a smear campaign

Originally Posted by Celvantis

Its unstable, Its harder to use, its has serious compatability issues, It has less tech support, and its own features causes instability in its own software such as WLAN search which can cause game breaking lag spikes every 60 seconds.

it's never been unstable
that is true, but that only matters if you're incompetant
not in my experiences

Originally Posted by TheBuzzSaw

The fact that Windows 7 is out already is proof of how little the world needed Vista. Windows 7 is fantastic. I've had the final version for several weeks (computer science student program). Windows 7 is everything that Vista should have been.

windows 7 is basically Vista+
same core
same drivers
stability in my experience is identical
GUI aside, the most noteable change between vista and 7 is the name.

Originally Posted by ZeldaMaster#1#1

I know. I had tried anything I could find on the internet that I saw as safe, and getting more RAM (I went from .5, to 1.5GB). I tried disabling useless services, TuneUp Utilities, etc.

o_o? I am a very heavy multitasker and I very rarely use more than 1 GB of RAM unless I have Photoshop and games up at the same time. I doubt it's the RAM that is the problem in your case, mate.

I'm a heavy multi tasker and am considering going up to 8GB since 4GB is begginning to cut it close at times...