Jump to content

Home

Vista and its Horror Stories...


SithRevan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey guys I have been in a real bind as to what I want to do. I have been thinking of upgrading my computer to Windows Vista Ultimate Edition when it comes out but I am not sure as I have heard Horror Stories about it. One of the things I have heard is that you cannot disable net bios on it and that really kinda makes me wonder if I should get it or not. I know that there are a lot of people here who know computers like the back of thier hands, know all of the facts and know if I am making the right decision or not. So if you guys could give me a couple of your honest opinions on whether or not I should get it I would really appreciate it. Thanks everybody.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I'm going to wait at least until the first Service Pack is released before getting Vista. It's not worth all the effort and trouble of an OS upgrade to pay for the pleasure of betatesting Microsoft's products for them. I'm in no hurry really since I haven't seen anything that Vista introduces that I feel I absolutely must have, and my current Win XP install is pretty stable and optimized, handling everything I need my computer for. If it ain't broken don't fix it. :)

 

In the past (unless my memory fails me) every OS Microsoft has released has been hideously full of bugs, oversights and security flaws initially, though they usually manage to fix them up rather decently in a few months to a year or so. Win XP was pretty buggy when it was first released, but now it rarely causes any trouble (for me anyway).

 

Why were you planning on getting Win Vista before you heard the horror stories? Just curious. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same goes for me. I'm not upgrading until I absolutely must. Windows media center's awesome and pretty stable. Vista, as far as I can tell, just looks better visually. I have no doubt that DirectX 10 will eventually be available for XP, though after Vista. The only thing I am pissed about is that Halo 2 is for PC Vista only, but since I have a 360, screw that.

 

The rediculous system requirements for Vista practically dictate a high end machine, which is not in my budget. The req's are even higher than mine is now, which is pretty much optimized for CAD and gaming. I won't shell out a couple grand just to get my comp Vista-ized until either a company pays for it or I have a much higher paycheck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been doing the home computer thing since before there was such a thing as DOS, let alone Windows. In that time, I've learned the hard way that the "newest and most shiny looking" is rarely also the best option.

 

What that means in practical terms is that generally speaking, never upgrade your OS until one or more of the following are met:

1. Your old OS no longer provides proper support for various hardware components.

2. New software you actually desire to use will not properly function on the old OS any more.

3. You buy a new machine that comes with the new OS, since unless you know your stuff (at least a little) it's usually more hastle than it's worth to get rid of what the machine came with and roll back to an older OS.

 

Above and beyond everything else, almost every new version of windows requires MORE system resources rather than less, which means on the same hardware, the OLD versions will probably run faster and with greater stability than the new -not counting of course if you happen to have a release that's known to be particularly buggy and unstable that is.

 

So, I myself know I won't be going anywhere near Vista until I really have to. Even if they manage to get it smooth and stable (which I don't expect to happen for about a year or so and a couple service packs plus dozens of hotfixes and patches), unless it offers me something I actually need, or substantial improvements I merely desire over XP, I'll still keep with the old stuff.

 

In all fairness, I've long been of the school of thought, "If it aint broke, don't fix it", and that definitely bears some influence on my way of thinking here, but having learned to do things this way over about the last three decades, I can honestly say it's the best advice I can offer.

 

In case my rambling was somehow not entirely clear, that would be you should probably wait until you find yourself going, "Hmm... this won't work without Vista" or at the very least, "Well, I guess I really need Vista for this game [and/or this hardware] to function as it's supposed to."

 

-Kitt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why were you planning on getting Win Vista before you heard the horror stories? Just curious. :)
I'm curious as well. :D

 

IMHO unless you have some compelling reason, e.g. a Vista feature you really need to have, then there is really no reason to upgrade when Vista is released. If you must play DirectX 10 enabled games as soon as they are released (MS Flight Simulator X, UT 2007, Hellgate: London, Crysis, Supreme Commander) then Vista is your OS but AFAIK most of those games won't be released until later in 2007.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why were you planning on getting Win Vista before you heard the horror stories? Just curious. :)

 

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

 

I'm curious as well. :D

 

IMHO unless you have some compelling reason, e.g. a Vista feature you really need to have, then there is really no reason to upgrade when Vista is released. If you must play DirectX 10 enabled games as soon as they are released (MS Flight Simulator X, UT 2007, Hellgate: London, Crysis, Supreme Commander) then Vista is your OS but AFAIK most of those games won't be released until later in 2007.

Well actually I really wanted to get it because well... the operating system and GUI looked pretty. I had no idea of the bugs or problems it might have. I think I might wait a while myself and see what M$ comes up with before I go buying it. Thanks for helping me decide and I hope anybody else who has the same bind can use this thread to help them make an informed decision. Thanks again everybody.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh...

 

Give it a couple months and there will probably be several "Vista-Style XP" conversions you can install if you're so inclined. Wouldn't shock me a bit, considering how many different looks I've seen done for the XP interface already.

 

Personally, I utterly hate the "cartoony", over-bubbled look of XP. Have since I had to move up to it. Which means of course I still run my rig in old-style "Classic 98" look or whatever it's exactly called. Yeah, I guess a lot of people probably consider it more borring and whatnot, but to me, it's simpler, cleaner, and does the job just as well if not a bit better and faster due to the "pretty things" my machine doesn't have to worry about, so it's good by me. :)

 

You get that a lot with us "old farts" though. Many of us still remember the days where everything was text and typing and GUIs didn't even exist, and there's at least a *couple* of us still breathing who prefer things to be as clean and simple as possible while still doing the job rather than all flashy and "ooooooh-inspiring" :lol:

 

-Kitt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh...

 

Give it a couple months and there will probably be several "Vista-Style XP" conversions you can install if you're so inclined. Wouldn't shock me a bit, considering how many different looks I've seen done for the XP interface already.

 

Personally, I utterly hate the "cartoony", over-bubbled look of XP. Have since I had to move up to it. Which means of course I still run my rig in old-style "Classic 98" look or whatever it's exactly called. Yeah, I guess a lot of people probably consider it more borring and whatnot, but to me, it's simpler, cleaner, and does the job just as well if not a bit better and faster due to the "pretty things" my machine doesn't have to worry about, so it's good by me.

 

You get that a lot with us "old farts" though. Many of us still remember the days where everything was text and typing and GUIs didn't even exist, and there's at least a *couple* of us still breathing who prefer things to be as clean and simple as possible while still doing the job rather than all flashy and "ooooooh-inspiring"

 

-Kitt

I actually have one of the best Vista Desktop Conversion themes on my computer. I really did want Vista because it had the cool GUI, the WDDM feature, and the built-in Xbox 360 support. Other then those things I not being in XP I am very happy with my computers config. I just though I would ask if it is a good idea and I am really glad you all helped me out so much.:D

desktopprettycy8.th.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, Vista isn't a must-have yet. I'd say you wait about a year, till aall those Vista-specific softwares start rolling in. That is when you jump ship and enter the new OS. If you really want it right now, I say you go for stuff like Vista Transformation Pack, Desktop Sidebar and so on. Besides, I don't see Vista having a function that you absolutely need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you really shouldnt have to upgrade if you think you are managing fine without it :)

 

Having beta tested Vista for media center and SLI purposes I can comment that Vista Media Center is an exceptional improvement. Even now, I have a Vista media center rig(running RC2) that is working a treat :)

 

SLI stuff....was difficult to discern as nvidia hasnt really polished their drivers yet.... but the potential is definitely there for some of the restrictive bottlenecks that exist in XP to definitely be reduced in a helpful way.

 

MS is putting alot of stock in the benefits DX 10 will bring, all we can do really is wait til someone runs some decent benchies with Vista and DX10 kit. (Not these monkeys who test DX10 cards on xp pro and expect to tell us anything special >>points at Toms Hardware<< )

 

If all you are upgrading for is to get 'the vista look' then you really are better off with the transformation pack, and a manicure, for being so vain and shallow... like Rhettski says, doing Vista properly is going to be a hardware leap for many... which costs $$$

 

mtfbwya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't be touching it with a ten foot pole for at least a few years. Far too much of a system hog and too much monies as well.

 

XP Pro has been very good to me. *hugs XP Pro*

Amen

I don't think anything else needs to be said, besides the fact that MS is evil for releasing Vista/DX10 ONLY games...And if KotOR 3 turns out to be one of them I will personally shoot Bill Gates, just because...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amen

I don't think anything else needs to be said, besides the fact that MS is evil for releasing Vista/DX10 ONLY games...And if KotOR 3 turns out to be one of them I will personally shoot Bill Gates, just because...

 

Im not one to defend MS by any stretch, but that's bollocks....as if Lucasarts and their partners(?Obsidian) would make a move with a definitely limited sales potential.

 

Having Vista's DX10 and some compliant hardware may mean that you may be able to get some lighting effects, rendering advantages DX9 doesnt have - this doesnt mean it wont run.

 

This is hardly a new thing. A few of you are perhaps a bit too young to remember that the exact same thing happened from DX7>>8 and DX8>>9. Does DX9 work properly with Windows 2000 or previous ?? Does DX9 hardware effects work properly in Win 2000 or previous ?? etc etc.

 

OS that are written to utilise more powerful hardware that can 'do more things'(technical term!)...is that really beyond many people's understanding ??

 

Unfortunately, PCs, like anything else, need upgrading to have access to current technological capabilities. Blame Moore's Law ;)

 

When people whine about new tech it reminds me of those news articles when the first car was invented.......sttaing that it was 'preposterous to tow a carriage without the aid of horses' lolz :p

 

mtfbwya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd prefer just to stick with XP until I have to upgrade. Vista is all visual, something which in my opinon comes second to functionality. I want something to work well without many problems first before I think about how good it looks. To do that I'd need to shell out for a better computer, seeing as Vista needs a high-end machine, but I don't have the money for that at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
I'd prefer just to stick with XP until I have to upgrade. Vista is all visual, something which in my opinon comes second to functionality. I want something to work well without many problems first before I think about how good it looks. To do that I'd need to shell out for a better computer, seeing as Vista needs a high-end machine, but I don't have the money for that at the moment.

 

 

I admit ~snipped~, but with that said, I am turning and running back to XP.

 

Yes, Vista does look cool, but thats about it. I found the start menu too cluttered and harder to navigate, my Epson R340 with Vista drivers wouldn't work, all the security pop-ups are very annoying, sharing printers between a wireless notebook and hard-wired desktop with windows or network magic is way too complicated, Divx player or converter isnt supported, and I personally like the Media Center in XP better; except the layout which is better in Vista.

 

I noticed that the OS starts up faster than XP, and sharing media in Windows Media Player is okay (its a lot slower to play songs than using itunes, but it can stream video). Visually, WMP 11 and IE7 are alot better looking than in XP, and the transparency and program stacking are really cool as well.

 

As for hardware, it doesn't actually take as much as people think to run the OS, maybe future programs will requrie more. I have an old HP a818n from Jan '05 with 1.5G ram, 2.93 P4 (no HT), and a nvidia GeForce 6200 which got a Vista experience rating of 3.2 out of 5. My new dell e1505, with 1G ram, 1.83 Core Due, and ATI X1300 only got a performace rating of 2.8.

 

I decided today after trying to print a ten page english final that is due in about two hours, that Vista isn't ready for the average consumer. If you have any old periphials, you might be SOL. My printer printed fine in XP and now it prints a page or two then stops and i have to print it page by page (of course my works cited page won't print :() If you wait for a while, most bugs will be fixed and more hardware will be fully supported.

 

Hopefully this helps anyone deciding to upgrade to Vista, but if it doesnt come with a new computer or you absolutely need it, Vista can hold off for a while. Some features are nice, but the negatives outweighed the positives for me and I am switching back.

 

Please don't discuss illegal activities on LFN. --Jae

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vista for me has had Zero issues . . . . . . the only thing I ran into was with Kotor 2 but that is now solved and fixed.

 

As for all the horror stories of people having major issues with Vista, those mainly come from people who have a bad pc already and don't have the requirements to upgrade anyways,but not everyone of course, some issues arise from what cards you ahve and other things as well.

 

There are a few reasons as to why I even have the new OS. To start off, my old pc has XP and the new one I bought came with Vista. I think that is one of the MAJOR reasons why people have so many issues wth Vista is becasue they upgrade instead of buying anew pc.

 

I needed a new pc, lol, I don't even wanna talk about how annoying my old 2001 or something pc was getting. Without a new pc I could not have programs such as Maya 8.5 (3D Modeling program), Adobe CS3 stuff and of course games like KOTOR. And I happen to buy a new pc when Vista was released so no real way around that.

 

But anyways I like Xp and I like Vista the same really, I have yet to have major problems with Vista and every program/game I have installed ran without error and worked fine

 

So overall and my last comment/advice . . . . don't buy Vista UNLESS you plan to just buy a new pc alltogether :) And don't buy a new pc unless you really need it becasue your old one (like mine) just couldn't keep up with the pace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don´t get fooled by the marketing stunt. I doesn´t really bring anything new that you most urgently need. Also, a lot of programs don´t have Vista support (yet) which means they don´t work or not properly on your system.

 

I really didn´t have a choice since my new Vaio came with Vista but I whouldn´t have cried if it would have came with XP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys, just saw this recently, but I guess it's been planned since last year. Starting on June 1 of this year, laptops will be required to have hybrid hard drives in them if they want to carry the Vista Premium logo on them.

 

Most articles I've seen on this have a negative slant ("ooh Microsoft is going make me pay more for my laptop now!") But why is this a good thing? Because ReadyDrive technology of Vista should improve battery life by not spinning the hard drive so often, reduce heat, speed up hibernation and fetch times of large, frequently used files.

 

Forcing laptops to have certain hardware specs to wear The Logo, is not a bad thing IMO. HHDs have been slow in coming to the market place having only arrived earlier this year. ReadyDrive is one of the best features I've seen touted in the marketing of Vista and it's a shame that a good technology hasn't been more distributed so far due to hardware production. For all of its evil reputations, Microsoft can still kick hardware technology into gear through such marketing tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...