BadVista Declares Victory

"On December 15, 2006, the FSF launched its campaign to advocate for the freedom of computer users, opposing adoption of Microsoft Windows Vista and promoting free -- as in freedom -- software alternatives. Two years later, the campaign has nearly 7,000 registered supporters, the name Vista is synonymous in the public eye with failure, and we are declaring victory.

Like Olympic marathon winner Joan Benoit Samuelson, we look at victory as "milestones on a very long highway". We have not yet convinced all Windows users or even all Vista users to switch to a fully free operating system like "Linux". There is still much work to be done and there are many milestones to reach. But the BadVista campaign was launched to achieve specific goals, and as we bring it to a close we should recognize and celebrate what the campaign and everyone who supported it has achieved."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
verb3k3663d ago (Edited 3663d ago )

Windows works ultra fast when you first install it, but it will start lagging as days pass.

f7897903662d ago

Antivirus software is also reason for longer startup times. Not like they can make it smaller when so many viruses are coming out.

hfaze3662d ago

The difference is that Windows Vista DESERVED the smear campaign... While Windows 7 does not.

Vista is a resource HOG if I have ever seen one. Even with all of the flashy eye-candy disabled, it still takes 20-30% more RAM for the OS alone than XP did.

So far I have all of the eye-candy turned on in Windows 7, and I'm only sitting at 1.1 - 1.3GB out of 4GB of RAM used (and that's with multiple FireFox windows open with multiple tabs in them).

With Vista Ultimate running on my iMac (also with 4GB of RAM), the same tasks running on my Windows 7 laptop take between 1.7 - 2.0GB of RAM (eye-candy, multiple FireFox windows w/ multiple tabs, same desktop widgets).

I thank all of the companies and organizations that gave Microsoft such major flak over Vista. It has resulted in Microsoft going back to the drawing board and coming up with a FAR superior OS to replace Vista.

Nathan Drake3663d ago

Can't be bothered with the OS considering Windows 7 is just around the corner.

Proxy3662d ago (Edited 3662d ago )

I would wait for Windows 7 at this point as well.

However, most of the things people complain about with Vista will be equally applicable to Windows 7.

"I can't run it on 512mb ram."
"It doesn't run this unsupported, and no longer updated program I use."
"I doesn't support my hardware from some obscure company who hasn't released a driver update since 2002."

Only problem Windows 7 might manage to improve on is the media rep.

hfaze3662d ago

Trust me, you really didn't miss much by skipping over Windows Vista.

I have Vista Ultimate running on my iMac, and Windows 7 Ultimate running on my laptop. I can honestly say that Windows 7 is a HUGE improvement over Vista.

If Microsoft would have just skipped over Vista and waited until Windows 7 to release a successor to XP, they would have done MUCH better PR-wise... ;-)

kyleg3662d ago

vista is not as bad as you think. it runs good on my laptop and it does not have so many problems now. it does not run slow at all and i just change some setting to fit my needs so now it seem like xp to tell you. i been using vista for a year now and i love it nothing wrong with it.

i will wait too see everything on windows 7 to see how it does. only time will tell if it will fail.

Viper73662d ago

"it runs good on my laptop"

Lucky for you, unfortunately there have been plenty with problems and plenty that do not see any point in the upgrade. For me it has been pretty much hell because my system had Vista installed while having only 1gb ram.

caladbolg7773662d ago (Edited 3662d ago )

I'm a Vista user. I've been using it on my gaming PC since the beginning. I've had a few hiccups every now and then, but never anything too showstopping. From firsthand experience, I'd agree with the sentiment, "Vista provides no incentive to upgrade from the OS that I already have." That said, if you can manage to pick up a copy of Vista at a price comparable to XP, then, IMO, there's no reason the "average user" shouldn't.

FantasyStar3662d ago

I have Vista Home Premium and it works great on my machine! Granted I have Quad-Core and 4 Gigs of RAM, but it's a gaming machine to start with. As long as Vista works right, I've no complaints. I upgraded because I wanted to test out the new NTFS tweaks and boy was it worth it! 36MB on a SATA 7200RPM!

Also, it's nice knowing at what exact MB/s my files are transferring at.

Proxy3662d ago (Edited 3662d ago )

Works just fine. Sure, there is some RAM caching to the HDD that slows things down, but not too bad.

I do manage to play Sins of a Solar Empire on my laptop, that games uses about 800 mb of ram, leaving only 200 for Vista and everything else. The game runs fine. It takes a minute to open and close or alt+tab, but it's not a big problem. So Viper, I would suggest that your "hell" is caused by factors outside your ram.

Vista also start faster than Ubuntu. I duel boot both Vista and Ubuntu on both my computers, one is that laptop I mentioned, the other is a high end desktop, on both hardwares Vista starts faster (starting from scratch, I am NOT talking about a hibernation wake).

I would use Linux exclusively if it were not for gaming.

hfaze3662d ago

If you like Vista (shudder), you will LOVE Windows 7. It takes FAR less system resources than Vista does, boot/shutdown is significantly better than Vista, and so far I have not run into any application compatibility issues (unlike Vista, ATI Catalyst, and Rhapsody not playing together worth a FLIP!)

I have Vista Ultimate running on my iMac, and Windows 7 Ultimate beta 1 running on my laptop, and I can whole-heartedly say that Windows 7 is what Windows Vista should have been.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3662d ago
mephman3662d ago

I'm sure they're proud of themselves for getting a massive 7,000 people. I know I would be, especially considering how many people actually use an Operating System.

There is very little wrong with Vista for personal use, the only problems really come with business use. I've been using Vista for 2 years now and it's still running just as fine as when I first installed it and I've never had it crash, or any hardware conflicts/driver problems.

Proxy3662d ago

The only 2 crashes I have ever had in my years with Vista were 2 memory dumps. Was Vista to blame? Who knows, it could just as well be a hardware problem.

GlibGamer3662d ago

While I'm all for informing users of other options (pending that they're intelligent enough to use them), I cannot stand when places like badvista spread misinformation and lies to further their own cause.

My name is Jon, and I use everything but Apple products. that could change, seeing as how Apples are nothing more than an Intel platform running Linux... LMAO. ;)

hfaze3662d ago

"My name is Jon, and I use everything but Apple products. that could change, seeing as how Apples are nothing more than an Intel platform running Linux... LMAO. ;)"

Ok, where to start on this one... :-P

First off, MacOS X is based on the Mach microkernel that was brought about for NEXTstep (the company that Steve Jobs founded back in 1985 after being forced out of Apple).

Second off, what's wrong with Linux? Anyone making that kind of comment either has never used Linux, or is just so accustomed to the OS that they use that anything else is instantly garbage.

Show all comments (20)