Vistaish Upgrade Sickness

[sinthetix 0]

I am currently running Windows XP Professional and 2 different flavors of Linux on my box. I've heard lots about the new Vista release from alot of people and I was wondering if anyone could point out anything seriously retarded about it. I would like to upgrade and be up with the times but even as XP was the big buzz for a while I stuck hardcore with Windows 2000 Professional and Linux for a long time before upgrading. I thought XP sucked and I was for the most part right, Windows 2000 suited me enough and worked just fine for me. So is there anyone out there who could point out serious flaws in Windows Vista to me? And please don't rant about how insecure it is, everyone knows Microsoft sucks with security.

[metr4 0]

Okay... I'll tell you couple of ugly things about vista. First of all as you probably expected me to say.. - hardware resources consumption. My Pentium D820 2.8GHz with 1 gb of memory is screaming under vista. Secondly, Vista is still not compatible with a huge amount of programs. Vista's Aero effects are only available to the DX9.0 supporting graphics cards, meaning you won't see those crystal clear transparencies and stuff like that on your older graphics card. Finally, vista by no means the fastest OS ever made by Micrososft as they calim... and you'll find out why unless you have a quad core with 4GB of memory and 2 8800GTX's in SLi

[Galahad 0]

Other major flaw, aside the fact that it requires 3000? machine to run it is, and I rant about it all the time (I know I'm boring, but it realy gets to me) is the all Trusted Computing "technology"... With TCPA, every time you upgrade a computer, you need to contact Micro$oft, and tell them "Hello Mr. Micro$oft, I just bought new memory module, and installed it, can you please activate my Windows?", and good Mr. Micro$oft activates your Windows... I supose in the future, when majority of population switches to Vista, they can start charging for new activation... Even 20? would keep them satisfied... And you won't be able to do a thing.. Second, you won't be able to install hardware, that isn't TCPA compliant... That means that if you buy a memory module, from TwinMOS or some other company that isn't in the TCPA, you won't be able to use it! So, you'd have to buy much more expensive module, from say,IBM! I also read about plans, that even Internet access would be restricted based on TCPA... Something about servers rejecting requests that don't contain valid TCPA code or something...That is the single, biggest con I have to using Vista... Ever... I'm already in process of switching to Linux...By the way, I saw a video on youtube, displaying Ubuntu 6.10 with XGL and Beryl... I started drooling, literaly... Does anyone know what the specs for that computrer were? One thing is for sure... Windows will NEVER be able to do that... Unles you have 4 quad-core CPU's, with each core running on 5GHz, and liquid nitrogen cooled

[pctech 0]

There are a few downfalls to Windows Vista, the biggest being program compatibilty. There are a number of programs that are not exactly compatibile with Vista. Second downfall would have to be the amount of resources that it takes up. And the third is that there is alot of hardware that is not working properly due to drivers that were not created propely and give major lagging. Other than that it is just another os. Just remember that they say, Windows Vista is just windows xp with a bunch of bells and wissles.

[AnkitGoswami 0]

Kubuntu rocks. And if you must use XP use Astonshell to jazz up the desktop.

[hitmanblood 0]

Well if you are already using linux why do you need windows in fact. I would agree with the other on this one one and maybe the biggest flaw of vista is resource consumption but there are some more bugs like the thing to type password as if you want to run some script as power user it is just boring and so on. List might get long over longer period of time.Otherwise I really don't see problem why would you switch to Vista if you have linux up and running as most files from widows are compatible with other files in linux and even new file extensions which came with the office 2007 will be probably available soon for linux users also if they are not already.

[techclave 0]

Before you make a decision to choose windows vista make sure your system resources are good enough. I have a 1 GB ram computer without any external graphic card . When i tried vista , the aero effects were not working for me. But when i borrowed a Geforce 256 k card from my pal , the aero effect was pretty good and worth a try,If you can afford to provide the system resources that vista needs, i guess it would definitely pay back with perfomance. The search feature is pretty cool with indexing made available, and also the level of security has to be increased quite a lot. Also, i heard the licenses for vista are pretty cheap. so , you need not worry about burning your pockets too much incase you want a legal copy for your machine.

[sniperkiller 0]

first of all before you change to vista, beware some stuff- almost every old program you got will have compability problems on vista (you'll get enough warnings from vista while installing the programs)- the prize for vista isn't something to laugh with, from expensive to even more expensive- before being able to run vista smoothly or with bit of lag, your pc has to be somewhat new in the line of pc's from todaya pc that is around the 4a5 years old will not be able to run vista smoothly, unless you composed it yourselfand be very open for a lot of errors and crashes of programs that you might encounter while running vista (personal experience ^^)i got a brand new pc from 1 year ago (2 gig ram, 4,4 ghz cpu 64bit, Geforce 7600GS) and got vista business, still i see some errors and slow downs from vista while starting up some programs that didn't slow down xp at allbut heh i guess it's my fault ^^ too much background programsstill i would prefer linux about windows, because of one major point ==> ERRORS in the system, almost NO crashes and a very good system for running on serversand the major difference between windows xp and windows vista is => usage of a lot more hardware nothing else

[hitmanblood 0]

a very good system for running on servers

I would like to point out that server systems are hole different thing than home users we were discussing about in this topic.

Also You have to consider how safe is program in which everyone can take a look by mere typing in the search engine. Because if someone sits long enough and wants to hack your server he will certainly find loophole in the linux based system also.

[Galahad 0]

I would like to point out that server systems are hole different thing than home users we were discussing about in this topic.
Also You have to consider how safe is program in which everyone can take a look by mere typing in the search engine. Because if someone sits long enough and wants to hack your server he will certainly find loophole in the linux based system also.

True... But the one trying to find a loophole, must be a computer guru, in order to mess around with Linux, whereas, in order to create a malicious program for Windows, you can attend a 21day programming course, and voila...

People forget, that linux was made from ground up, with security and networking in mind, whereas, windows was not built that way... Also, there are many indications that Vista uses a lot of old XP code, and that it is not true that they have written it from scratch... Still many security holes dating back from windows 95... I don't call that responsible programming...

Besides, Linux distributions have advanced significantly compared to several yeasr ago, and more and more distributions are more and more user friendly, that very soon, windows will be out of the game... Take a look at Ubuntu 6.10, with Beryl... It's a 3D cube desktop... It runs smoothly on a 1.3GHz machine, with 512MB RAM, and GeForce 6600 with 128M RAM... While playing a movie, and mp3's... Desktop is ofcourse transparent, and you can see movie from behind - inverted! And look what's required for Vista alone to operate... Ages away from Linux...

I won't even talk about windows price which is measured in hundreds of dollars, whereas, linux is free...

[hitmanblood 0]

True... But the one trying to find a loophole, must be a computer guru, in order to mess around with Linux, whereas, in order to create a malicious program for Windows, you can attend a 21day programming course, and voila...
People forget, that linux was made from ground up, with security and networking in mind, whereas, windows was not built that way... Also, there are many indications that Vista uses a lot of old XP code, and that it is not true that they have written it from scratch... Still many security holes dating back from windows 95... I don't call that responsible programming...

Besides, Linux distributions have advanced significantly compared to several yeasr ago, and more and more distributions are more and more user friendly, that very soon, windows will be out of the game... Take a look at Ubuntu 6.10, with Beryl... It's a 3D cube desktop... It runs smoothly on a 1.3GHz machine, with 512MB RAM, and GeForce 6600 with 128M RAM... While playing a movie, and mp3's... Desktop is ofcourse transparent, and you can see movie from behind - inverted! And look what's required for Vista alone to operate... Ages away from Linux...

I won't even talk about windows price which is measured in hundreds of dollars, whereas, linux is free...

OK I agree it is easier to find security hole in windows then in linux and as far as I can recall there were only two or three general viruses for linux operating system. So I agree it is probably more secure.

Then again Linux was not made from scratch it is based on Unix systems which missed few moduls which Linus Torvalds wrote and placed on the web and then people started joining the brand new thing called linux.

And yes there is influnce that linux is free and that you have to pay a lot for windows. But windows has still many features which linux has trouble to implement. Like nice graphical user interface it is advanced and it can look like windows but it is still not that. Then it is certainly not user friendly as windows and it probably never will if current trend is continued there are just few distributions which work actually without some more torubling intereference like Ubuntu and Suse if I am not wrong.

[harshcpu 0]

There are some positives and negatives to Vista. Mostly negatives though, the main negative that vista uses allot of resources that previous versions of windows which requires you to have the most up-to-date hardware with the up-to-date drivers. Another negative to vista is the fact that it all the programs that you may use in earlier versions of windows may not be compatible with windows vista. Last the negative is the UAC (User Account Control). Windows ask you for every detail for "security reasons" even opening certain programs, windows will ask you if you allow it to access your computer.

[hitmanblood 0]

There are some positives and negatives to Vista. Mostly negatives though, the main negative that vista uses allot of resources that previous versions of windows which requires you to have the most up-to-date hardware with the up-to-date drivers. Another negative to vista is the fact that it all the programs that you may use in earlier versions of windows may not be compatible with windows vista. Last the negative is the UAC (User Account Control). Windows ask you for every detail for "security reasons" even opening certain programs, windows will ask you if you allow it to access your computer.

Yes you are right but Microsoft's operating systems are almost always in advantage then hardware I think that these resources which vista needs will in fact be minor issue in some year time or even less. And furthermore thing is that you should consider that most of the people in the world use windows as their operating system with exception to the power users.

And also this thing you are mentioning for security reasons can be turned off I had some problems with it and it is really boring but you will turn it off and leave open only for starting of the crucial programs or when accessing crucial system components. And it will be ok.

And about drivers it is simply not true it will operate easier and better and you will experience better performance with vista but it does not require new drivers all the time it is just nonsense if it would do that. Wouldn't you agree.