From this Vista, it looks like the same old Microsoft

Just when you thought it was safe to convert to Windows Vista, Microsoft changes its mind, again. This soap opera is getting to be a little old.

The story is too old to be commented.

Will Microsoft ever get it right :'( ?

ProfessionalTroll3686d ago

Nope,that's why I switched to Apple;No windows,No problems.

DevastationEve3686d ago

Quoted from the article:

"Vista is slower and less compatible than XP"

should read:

"Vista ON OLD HARDWARE is slower"

Also, hardware loses its compatibility NOT because of Microsoft but because hardware manufacturers don't care to support their products through driver updates. That's what forces people to buy newer devices to get the functionality they were getting before. But, hey that's how they get you to buy the new hardware IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Yes, it sucks to have to buy new things just because someone says UPGRADE and you gotta do it. But that's got nothing to do with Vista. It's just how hardware MFGs make you buy their new line of products, all baring that new Works with Vista sticker.

DJ3686d ago

I guess when I bought a $1600 computer that came with XP, I wrongly assumed that it would be able to handle whatever operating system that was thrown at it 4 years down the line.

But alas, I need to spend another $1500 for a new computer if I expect to run Vista at its very basic, and another $500 in upgrades if I want it to run optimally. Yes, it's our faults as consumers that Microsoft made an OS that runs slower AND uses far more Memory/CPU/GPU resources. Thank you. Thank you for reminding us our stupidity.

hfaze3686d ago

Yet I have run into the issues that this article is talking about...

I have an Acer Aspire 5672 Wlmi laptop (Core Duo 1.6Ghz, 2GB RAM, 100GB 7200RPM SATA HDD, and an ATI Radeon Mobility x1400 128MB) that has one of those "Made for XP, Vista Ready" stickers on it.

When Vista released, I picked up a copy of Vista Ultimate through the company store, and installed it on my Acer. HUGE drop in performance compared to XP. I went ahead and restored the Norton Ghost image I had made of XP before the install, and just shelved my copy of Vista Ultimate.

Later on, I got an iMac (Core2Duo 2.4Ghz, 4GB RAM, 320GB 5400 RPM SATA HDD, and an ATI RadeonHD x2400), and decided to check out Boot Camp. I installed that copy of Vista, and it ran GREAT.

The thing I don't understand is that my Acer isn't that much slower than my iMac, yet the difference between them running Vista is night and day.

Vista on BRAND NEW hardware isn't that bad... As far as any PC that didn't ship with Vista, I would not recommend the upgrade.

And honestly, after using Vista Ultimate for a while, I can say that I GREATLY prefer XP. Vista just gets in your way too much. With all of the security prompts, and the fact that it doesn't run all of the software I use (try running Steinberg Cubase SX 2 on Vista... :-P), I'm personally sticking with XP if I have to use Windows... ;-)

I just can't believe that after all the development time that Vista had, THIS is what we get? Bleh...

Merritt3686d ago

Quite frankly in PC terms 4 years is a long way down the line. I would dream of my laptop being able to run the newest software. As it stands I have a desktop PC that runs Vista flawlessly!

For those complaing about the security alerts, tone them down and tweak it to your own system, or perhaps your dad doesn't allow you to mess with the admin functions.

Macs are good, but I'd rather not pay top of the line trendy prices to "look" cool, I'd rather have function throughout my whole network.

DJ3686d ago

Adobe Suite CS3 and Lightwave 9.5 both run faster than previous versions, despite my computer being 4 years old. And constant fiddling with the OS should not be required. It should Just Work, and not get in my way all the time.

f7897903686d ago

I can build one for $600 that plays Crysis on high

TheDude2dot03686d ago

It's not just that Vista makes things slow. It makes every small thing harder to do than XP. The only good thing about Vista is the Open File Location thing.

DevastationEve3686d ago (Edited 3686d ago )

You guys disagreed with me because I'm wrong, or because you hate Vista?

Because the logic I applied there believe it or not applies to EVERYTHING in life. From the proposed increase in MacDonald's Dollar Menu to 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 and 2010 models of a single vehicle!

This is how companies ensure that there will be a reason to sit at the table at next month's meeting! They don't sit idle once they've released some new product. They get right to work on the next one, and then the next, and then the next! Otherwise what to do they get paid for?! You can't accuse Microsoft alone when this is something done by all companies.

And Apple is no cleaner - ask them about what to do with your Power Mac G5 you purchased in 2003-2004! They switched to Intel in 2005 which obsoleted anything with an IBM processor prior to their switch. At least Microsoft isn't in a position like that that they would push out newer hardware and force people to upgrade just to keep their iPods synched.

Gambit073685d ago

I got the very 1st batch of the flat screen iMac power PC, a month later they switched it to Intel, I thought I'm toast, but it never got in my way and my computer is working fine, also my ipod works perfectly, the only thing I hate is that I can't use Boot Camp.

JosefTor3685d ago

I actually kind of like Vista but I totally disagree with your argument that Vista is faster or even fast on newer hardware. I have used the fastest Core Duo chip there is with one of the best video cards and it is still........ SLOW! Word (applications) doesn't open any faster then on my old AMD 3000 GHZ computer with a Geforce 6600 card. If I have a top of the line computer I expect that I will barely if at all see loading screens. I guess my comment is a negative about most operating systems today but... Microsoft should focus their efforts on speed... not features. We have enough features... we've had enough features since almost the year 2000. The ONLY feature I can really say we should get in the long run is a touch screen feature (which some HP's and other computers do already anyway). So... how about speed...? Efficiency? When will Microsoft (and other OS makers) realize we want a quality OS... not one with an extra ____________ feature. Hell... I'm even testing their new PC Advisor for them and all I can ask is why do we need it? It tells me the same things 5 other programs tell me. How many programs do I need warning me UAC is off? The people who know computers don't need the program and the people who have no clue... won't bother with or know about the feature.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3685d ago
DailyAddict3686d ago

I haven't made the jump just yet, but from some people with mainstream computers (at least 2gb ram, a decent processor, etc.) aren't having any problems. They all seem to like it. Vista from my own personal experience playing with it at friends' house that use it, etc. seems to be fine so long as you don't have a budget computer and that's because it's definitely a memory hog. If you have a good computer though, no one is having any problems with it. In fact, all of my friends say it works really well, especially with drivers as they have plugged in old stuff and it grabbed it immediately where XP didn't. I haven't made the jump mostly cause I'm cheap and just didn't want to buy it, but I'm probably going to in the near future.

If I had to complain about anything is that it's expensive. Home premium is nice, but everyone agrees that Ultimate is where it's at and Ultimate is expensive as hell.

MvmntInGrn3686d ago

I just got a new laptop and it is running vista, really it isn't as bad as I had heard, that being said it is a very high end notebook. For the most part the compatibility can be fixed with workarounds but it is definitely the weal point of vista.

Also I do not think the issue should be blamed on manufactures, if it all worked on XP then MS could have had it all running on Vista if they really tried to.

It'll be really annoying if they release a new Windows too soon, in the end I like Windows but it is far from perfect.


hfaze3686d ago

Seriously, just download a Live Evaluation copy of Ubuntu Linux (I would recommend the Kbuntu version for those used to Windows) and check it out.

You don't even have to install it. Just burn the disc image to a CD/DVD, and boot off of it.

There are alternatives, and thanks to Ubuntu even Linux novices can get around with ease...

Now if you're more of a tech-head like me, check out the Live Evaluation copy of OpenSuSE. Not quite as N00b friendly as Ubuntu, but has more of the cutting-edge advances in Linux (Compiz-Fusion, etc). I loves my wiggly windows and desktop cube... ;-)

ProfessionalTroll3686d ago

Poor Microsoft,still trailing behind Apple,Sony,Google,and Nintendo.

Show all comments (37)
The story is too old to be commented.