Windows Vista, why should you get it?

[Zylstra]

Yes, this is a bit of a rant.

Why did Microsoft add the Windows Vista eye-candy, even if it requires more resources?

Aero, the program that adds the special effects like Windows Card Flip, Glass Effect, Transparent Task Bars/Menu Bar, is in fact, all for eye-candy.
But why?

You see, when a new operating system comes out, the major change is the kernel. You cant see the kernel, and people complain "its the same as it was before, this is the same thing I just had!"

When you upgrade software, and nothing looks different, is it different?
You have to make it look different to convince people, otherwise, they think what they have now is the same thing, whether or not you believe this is your own preference.

They change things around so you SEE the difference, people always feel like they have to SEE something in order to believe it.

Now, another thing to remember is that Aero utilizes the GRAPHICS CARD, not your CPU! If you have a descent graphics card, you will not be wasting your CPU usage.
As for RAM: Yeah, they did go a bit too far in that department, but all over, Vista itself doesn't require much RAM. Aero wont kill you, and 1GB of RAM isn't going to leave you with almost nothing.

"I'm still not convinced I need the whole Aero thing. Its crap, and its sucky."
My answer to you: Disable it. Its not hard. Right click your desktop, click Personalise, and change the theme to Vista Basic. That's all you need to do. Or, you can even change it to Windows Classic (like GX1_Man always does with new operating systems)

"Vista sucks! I [dislike] it!"
Mind reminding me why you dislikes Windows XP when it first came out? You didn't have a real reason, you just didn't think it as worthwhile. And now, you think its the greatest thing on earth. What now?
 (well, you've read to this point, it cant be as bad as I thought it was)
"Do I really need Vista?"
No, you don't need it, but it can be very nice to have, especially since many programs will eventually require it, and it does have many useful features. Vista is great for new users, since its menu layouts and the way the entire system functions on the screen is focused around being easier to use (for users who aren't planning on doing advanced things).

Comment if you want, but I don't plan on letting this get into an argument or war.

[The Saviour]

Too late...the war has begun!

Just kidding...

Anyway, I've tried Vista Beta...and not completely ready to change from XP...I use the Home version.

As we all know...Windows is like changing underwear...why can't they just get it right the first time and leave it alone...

You may notice that Vista seems a lot like Apples OSX...as far as the graphics go.  I'm pretty sure that's what Gates had in mind when Vista was being compiled...just my opinion guys...don't shoot!

I like Windows...I've grown attached to it and to me it's easier to use than an Apple computer...I'm just stuck in a rut, I guess.

You're absolutely right about it being "eye-candy", though Zylstra...

I agree whole-heartedly...nothing has changed...except for the fact you have to either upgrade all your hardware or buy a new computer that can handle Vista.

[Zylstra]

Microsoft codename "Longhorn" is not Windows Vista, in fact, Longhorn was abandoned by Microsoft. Vista is very different.
Windows Vista has 3D Graphics, Apple only uses 2D graphics in their OS... though, in all, its all 2D unless you are wearing 3D glasses. The graphics aren't really similar at all. If you use Mac OSX, you will see that, even though many users claim Vista is a copy of the Mac OS system, they are quite different. Also, keep in mind, Apple does not use anything original... at all. Poor Xerox...

[The Saviour]

I beg to differ...the "glassy" icons, or buttons, Vista uses is a direct rip-off of OSX.

[M1CH431]

Personally I love Vista. I recently bought a new computer and it came with Vista Home Premium and I have to say that it is really nice. The graphics are nice, and the computer I bought only has 1 gig of ram (for now) And it runs it very well. And personally it's not much different from Xp so when you first get it you can still get things done. For me right now I don't really see a difference with Xp and Vista but eventually I'll dwell further into it.

[dl65]

LOL.......... Funny this topic appears now.  
I just had to replace a machine the other day........ and decided it was prudent to go with the latest operating system.............. Perhaps a mistake........ but time will tell.
I am at the beginning of a Vista learning curve......... I have had the new box for 3 days now, and I have had numberous cursor lockups....... we are talking dozens........ so many in fact , that yesterday I formatted it and started clean again.   I formatted , added AVG ......... turned off auto updates......... and things seemed good..... no lockups. Then I did the unthinkable thing , I d/l and installed 16 critical ( recommended) updates.......... and quess what back to the lockups again...... oh yes and then there is the random message that IE has stopped and needs to be restarted. Upon running a diagnostic.......as to why, it points at Adobe flash player as the problem and also says that Adobe dont have a fix currently.........
what a joke.
So my question is ....... who is our resident Vista expert ?  Perhaps he or she may have some fixes.


dl65  

[M1CH431]

Well right now im crossing my fingers that what happened to dl65 doesn't happen to my computer LOL!

[Zylstra]

Cursor lockups:

Well, it seems that Vista is a buggy system, but the lockups could be driver/manufacturer error dependent. (As in: Its not Vistas fault, its the software that your manufacture installed)

Run Windows Update, install everything, there are quite a few issues that will be fixed, most recently, a few reliability issues have been fixed, resulting in less crashes.

You can try the Microsoft support forums (I think its a great idea that they are hosting better community support, and calling it a much more primary option for support, its FREE!)

If you have errors installing updates, it is free to contact Microsoft for security update problems, just mention that its a security update issue...

[Dusty]

For some obscure reason I just don't trust Vista with any serious work so am running it in parallel with XP (not on same hardware).   Have had some lockups and inexplicable happenings but so far no disasters.

I probably won't be committing to Vista till the release of Vista SP.2 at least.

[Calum]

Glad I saw this thread.
I'm considering buying a second PC and a new family desktop, and was considering buying Vista for them and XP/Vista dual boot for me.
My only concerns were speed and which version to get, I figured most of the problems had been solved by now.
Having read this, I think I'll stick with XP for both.
Oh, and one more thing.  I don't like Vista's Classic mode, it looks different somehow.
I don't want to have to get used to something entirely different when I "upgrade" my OS - in an upgrade, what I want to see is more speed, reliability, and security.  If I have to pay for this, then fine.  What I don't want is having to re-learn the entire OS.  Maybe that's just me . . . but I wouldn't want to trade last year's Ford Mondeo for this year's, and then find out the pedals are on the ceiling.

[patio]

Since SP1 for Vista wont be released to the public until Q1 of 2008 i would suggest anyone considering a new machine/OS to wait for the outstanding deals in the upcoming Holiday shopping season...
This makes not only economical sense but practical sense as well.
I have been beating the snot out of Vista since RC1 was sent to me from the Mothership. At every step it has definitely gotten better.
But i still don't think in my opinion it is ready to be the only platform the end user runs.
The best choice right now is to have a dual-boot setup with XP doing the grunt day to day duties while fooling around with Vista til you get it to be what you want it to be...not what Gates thinks you want it to be.

[Dusty]

Thanks Patio - I think what you posted just about mirrors my sentiments but in much more flowery language.

[Fed]

The best choice right now is to have a dual-boot setup with XP doing the grunt day to day duties while fooling around with Vista til you get it to be what you want it to be...not what Gates thinks you want it to be.

From a very clever person who mostly uses W2K.

[patio]

The best choice right now is to have a dual-boot setup with XP doing the grunt day to day duties while fooling around with Vista til you get it to be what you want it to be...not what Gates thinks you want it to be.

From a very clever person who mostly uses W2K.

            

[ale52]

I'm still on the W2K bandwagon as well.  I just ordered 2G of RAM from Crucial as I'm running 512 right now and the system runs fine.  I'll pop in those 2G and run Vista in a virtual machine.  No new hardware to buy and if the thing tanks, I'll just dump in from M$ Virtual PC.

Alan <>< 

[Dilbert]

Maybe that's just me . . . but I wouldn't want to trade last year's Ford Mondeo for this year's, and then find out the pedals are on the ceiling.

I agree wholeheartedly. I had to install Vista on a relative's computer (they paid me for the know-how, not so I could advise them on OSs...), and it took me an extra 10 minutes to do simple, everyday tasks. Then, of course, installing software was a bit of a problem: Compatibility. Multiple times, I had to try compatibility mode or (worse) not install drivers for hardware. This sucked. Of course, everyone knows the dreaded:



The actual PC not handy, I got this off the internet. We ALL know this little box. I bet $12 that they'll be tired of that in a year or less.

[Zylstra]

I don't want to have to get used to something entirely different when I "upgrade" my OS - in an upgrade, what I want to see is more speed, reliability, and security.  If I have to pay for this, then fine.  What I don't want is having to re-learn the entire OS.  Maybe that's just me . . . but I wouldn't want to trade last year's Ford Mondeo for this year's, and then find out the pedals are on the ceiling.

So... you want Windows 3.11?

ale52:
Dont let the performance of the VPC fool you, it may be greatly decreased simply since its on a VPC

Compatibility:
Its still better than a Macs performance and compatibility.

Dilbert:
I think 10 minutes is a bit of an exaggeration. There are quite a few things in different places, but overall, its very much the same. It only took me one week to get out of XP mode. (And, thats really not much time when you think about it)

[Dilbert]

Okay, a bit of one. But, if they tout their "ease of use", they'd best back it up.

[Jess607]

Reasons to "get" Windows Vista (right now):
DX10
It's pretty

[Calum]

So... you want Windows 3.11?

I don't go back that far.
What I'm saying is, radical changes aren't what I want to see.
Win2K/WinXP - to me, they are similar enough to be easy to use both, why can't Vista continue the trend?

[M1CH431]

I don't get why people say that Vista is so different. Personallyif your just doing simple tasks its very easy to use.

[evanparker2134]

I actually enjoy Vista very much. It plays [most] of my games flawlessly, although they perform better on XP (driver maturity). I did do a dual boot XP/Vista and am having trouble getting back into Vista after installing XP on a partition. If you could, go to the thread labeled "Vista/XP partition problems" and help me out. Appreciate it.

[Zylstra]

Driver concerns:
Though older hardware may not have drivers from the manufacturer, Windows Vista may have a generic driver for it. This is, basically, like a generic drug from the pharmacy. Its the same thing, but it costs less and it is used as a substitute. Now, yes, of course, XP does have the same support, but I cant come up with a contradiction, so this really hasn't changed much, except that newer hardware will work better in Vista than in XP, though, I doubt that hardware companies will just stop supporting XP all the sudden... SUPPORT LINUX FOR ONCE, BROAD-COM!

[reaper_tbs]

Windows Vista, why should you get it?

you shouldn't.

[Comp Guy]

Actually, having looked at some Linux OSs, Vista seems to copy them. And I'm glad I didn't get Vista until recently, as I am still having compatibility issues with it!

But I cannot lie.... I have NEVER liked XP, it was just so....

[Zylstra]

Actually, having looked at some Linux OSs, Vista seems to copy them. And I'm glad I didn't get Vista until recently, as I am still having compatibility issues with it!

But I cannot lie.... I have NEVER liked XP, it was just so....

I think that you will find, most Linux OS's have copied Windows, and Macintosh. (Specifically for the OS Desktop interface design, GUI)

[Comp Guy]

That could be.... Linux creators wouldn't want their OS to be too far from Windows. If they did, less people would use it because it would be much harder to learn.

[thedairyman]

Aero, the program that adds the special effects like Windows Card Flip, Glass Effect, Transparent Task Bars/Menu Bar, is in fact, all for eye-candy.
But why?

Because, if it had the same look as XP, why in the world would they call it Vista?

Why did Microsoft add the Windows Vista eye-candy, even if it requires more resources?

And then you said:

Now, another thing to remember is that Aero utilizes the GRAPHICS CARD, not your CPU! If you have a descent graphics card, you will not be wasting your CPU usage.

As for RAM: Yeah, they did go a bit too far in that department, but all over, Vista itself doesn't require much RAM. Aero wont kill you, and 1GB of RAM isn't going to leave you with almost nothing.

Okay, so I'm not a Vista user, but Vista has some of the features included with XP.
I at least took a test drive.

Mind reminding me why you dislikes Windows XP when it first came out? You didn't have a real reason, you just didn't think it as worthwhile. And now, you think its the greatest thing on earth. What now?

That's a different matter. Don't change the subject.

Comment if you want, but I don't plan on letting this get into an argument or war.

I don't think many people are here to start and argument or war, nor am I.
My best advice is to cut out as many visual effects as possible, without making it look like 'old style' Windows.

[Zylstra]

Aero, the program that adds the special effects like Windows Card Flip, Glass Effect, Transparent Task Bars/Menu Bar, is in fact, all for eye-candy.
But why?

Because, if it had the same look as XP, why in the world would they call it Vista?

*cough*
Kernel, people, Kernel

Why did Microsoft add the Windows Vista eye-candy, even if it requires more resources?

And then you said:

Now, another thing to remember is that Aero utilizes the GRAPHICS CARD, not your CPU! If you have a descent graphics card, you will not be wasting your CPU usage.

Correct. Resources include a graphics card, the graphics card is a resource, and since it requires a descent one, it requires a resource.

As for RAM: Yeah, they did go a bit too far in that department, but all over, Vista itself doesn't require much RAM. Aero wont kill you, and 1GB of RAM isn't going to leave you with almost nothing.

Okay, so I'm not a Vista user, but Vista has some of the features included with XP.
I at least took a test drive.

Mind reminding me why you dislikes Windows XP when it first came out? You didn't have a real reason, you just didn't think it as worthwhile. And now, you think its the greatest thing on earth. What now?

That's a different matter. Don't change the subject.

How is it different?
Its a reflect on past versions, and a reminder of the cause of todays argument. People dont like a little bit of change.

Comment if you want, but I don't plan on letting this get into an argument or war.

I don't think many people are here to start and argument or war, nor am I.
My best advice is to cut out as many visual effects as possible, without making it look like 'old style' Windows.

[Comp Guy]

Why does everyone like the old of the old Windows anyway?

[Zylstra]

Why does everyone like the old of the old Windows anyway?

You mean 3.1?
Because it did not crash, and I kid you not. When an application or something went wrong, you would press ALT+CTRL+DEL and Windows would tell you what happened, and you would either:
Press ALT+CTRL+DEL again, and restart
Press ENTER to fix the issue (usually just ending a crashed program)
Press ESC to do nothing and see what happens

It was simple. Now-a-days, with all the advanced drivers (older Windows versions didn't have all that great support of PnP drivers) and everything else we can do with computers, things crash and can go wrong.

Key word: Can go wrong

You see, in Windows 3.1 and earlier, crashes were likely. Pressing ALT+CTRL+DEL often resulted in lost information. (Keeping in mind that Windows 3.0 and earlier would only restart at ALT+CTRL+DEL, Windows 3.1 introduced a better way, which we still know today)

Today, things don't go wrong as often though.

Another great reason to get Vista: (having to do with Windows help)
If you have Internet, it access the Microsoft Help Database directly. You get the most current information, and an exact description and solution of the problem.
If you don't have Internet, you wont get that great of help, since its whatever came with your computer, which may be outdated.

Now, true, this prevents Microsoft from making money from support, but it gives a better satisfaction rate, since I recently had a problem with my computer, and I could find out what the problem was quite quickly.

But, we have to remember: Not everything in Windows Vista has a solution, but theres this cool program called "Problems & Solutions" that holds on to all your reported errors, eventually, a solution will be added, and that information put on the Microsoft Help database.

[patio]

Dilbert You May Need This...

[Dark Blade]

Why does everyone like the old of the old Windows anyway?

You mean 3.1?
Because it did not crash, and I kid you not. When an application or something went wrong, you would press ALT+CTRL+DEL and Windows would tell you what happened, and you would either:
Press ALT+CTRL+DEL again, and restart
Press ENTER to fix the issue (usually just ending a crashed program)
Press ESC to do nothing and see what happens

It was simple. Now-a-days, with all the advanced drivers (older Windows versions didn't have all that great support of PnP drivers) and everything else we can do with computers, things crash and can go wrong.

Key word: Can go wrong

You see, in Windows 3.1 and earlier, crashes were likely. Pressing ALT+CTRL+DEL often resulted in lost information. (Keeping in mind that Windows 3.0 and earlier would only restart at ALT+CTRL+DEL, Windows 3.1 introduced a better way, which we still know today)

Today, things don't go wrong as often though.

A computer that doesn't crash.... virutally non-existant these days. If something can go wrong, it usually will.

Another great reason to get Vista: (having to do with Windows help)
If you have Internet, it access the Microsoft Help Database directly. You get the most current information, and an exact description and solution of the problem.
If you don't have Internet, you wont get that great of help, since its whatever came with your computer, which may be outdated.

Now, true, this prevents Microsoft from making money from support, but it gives a better satisfaction rate, since I recently had a problem with my computer, and I could find out what the problem was quite quickly.

But, we have to remember: Not everything in Windows Vista has a solution, but theres this cool program called "Problems & Solutions" that holds on to all your reported errors, eventually, a solution will be added, and that information put on the Microsoft Help database.

You know, if Vista didn't have so many problems, it wouldn't need the Microsoft Help Database. But I know that many of the problems listed there will be caused by people not knowing what to do, mainly because they aren't used to it like they're used to XP.

[Comp Guy]

Vista still has a lot of support issues too.

[Zylstra]

Dilbert You May Need This...

The MSCONFIG method works best

But, we have to remember: Not everything in Windows Vista has a solution, but theres this cool program called "Problems & Solutions" that holds on to all your reported errors, eventually, a solution will be added, and that information put on the Microsoft Help database.

You know, if Vista didn't have so many problems, it wouldn't need the Microsoft Help Database. But I know that many of the problems listed there will be caused by people not knowing what to do, mainly because they aren't used to it like they're used to XP.

Vista handles the same errors as XP, but with Vista, it just has better support for the same errors (though, there are new errors since many of the XP errors were fixed)

Compatibility problems with a piece of software that wont work on Vista?
Well, it was probably poorly designed then.

[Amrykid]

i love vista and heres a picture of my desktop in Vista Home Premium (not beta).

any more pics of vista ya want.
DX10 in Halo?
Windows Explorer?
3d flip?

[Zylstra]

This is my Vista desktop

By Zylstra555

[Amrykid]

whats Veoh?
and where you get the wallpaper?

[Zylstra]

whats Veoh?
and where you get the wallpaper?

Veoh is a video application, it plays videos from Veoh services and downloads videos on a subscription list (kind of like a higher quality version of Youtube)
www.veoh.com

My wallpaper comes from an HD Wallpaper website. You can sort by screen resolution, try it out:
http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper/index.php?sort=date

[Comp Guy]

How funny, I always thought you were older, Zylstra.

[firequeen]

I just set up a new computer I bought and it has Vista - and tomorrow I am going on the help line to remove it entirely and install XP

[Amrykid]

why do you hate vista?

[Comp Guy]

Yeah, why do you? (I'm just curious)

[Zylstra]

How funny, I always thought you were older, Zylstra.

Only 16....

I just set up a new computer I bought and it has Vista - and tomorrow I am going on the help line to remove it entirely and install XP

Have fun trying to get new hardware on an old OS!

why do you hate vista?

Its interesting, how many people say that they "hate" Vista without giving a valid reason...

[Amrykid]

its for now reason

[Dilbert]

I don't hate it, I just prefer the more stable and comfortable XP box I've got now. Nothing's broken, why fix it?

[Zylstra]

I don't hate it, I just prefer the more stable and comfortable XP box I've got now. Nothing's broken, why fix it?

Are you trying to tell me you dont want to download the 7GB SP1 pack when it comes out?
(Yes, the standalone requires 7GB... but after its installed, you only need 2GB. The Streamline only downloads what you need)

[Dilbert]

Right.

[Comp Guy]

I don't hate it, I just prefer the more stable and comfortable XP box I've got now. Nothing's broken, why fix it?

Are you trying to tell me you dont want to download the 7GB SP1 pack when it comes out?
(Yes, the standalone requires 7GB... but after its installed, you only need 2GB. The Streamline only downloads what you need)

They are already planning a SP?

[Zylstra]

I don't hate it, I just prefer the more stable and comfortable XP box I've got now. Nothing's broken, why fix it?

Are you trying to tell me you dont want to download the 7GB SP1 pack when it comes out?
(Yes, the standalone requires 7GB... but after its installed, you only need 2GB. The Streamline only downloads what you need)

They are already planning a SP?

Yes. I think you will find, most likely, that XP probably had an SP at around the same time (dont count on my word, I admit, I disliked XP greatly when it first came out)
Half the XP discs out there have SP1 on them anyways

Vista's SP1 will be out around November, I think
That will be fun

[The Saviour]

Vista's SP1 will be out around November, I think
That will be fun

That's definitely an understatement...

Would love to see the posts flying around here when that happens...

[Zylstra]

Vista's SP1 will be out around November, I think
That will be fun

That's definitely an understatement...

Would love to see the posts flying around here when that happens...

Actually, I am rather excited
I dont ever recall seing a patch where making the system more reliable and incresing preformance. (*coughfs and points in ME's direction*)

The system is stable now, but I really want to see these even better improvements come across.

[Comp Guy]

Vista's SP1 will be out around November, I think
That will be fun

That's definitely an understatement...

Would love to see the posts flying around here when that happens...

Actually, I am rather excited
I dont ever recall seing a patch where making the system more reliable and incresing preformance. (*coughfs and points in ME's direction*)

The system is stable now, but I really want to see these even better improvements come across.

Actually, I sorta just started learning about all that after XP SP2 came out. But yes, it'll be nice to have an improved version of Vista come out.

And besides, it's gonna take a while 'till virtually all programs have Vista compatibility.

[Zylstra]

Vista's SP1 will be out around November, I think
<snipo>
And besides, it's gonna take a while 'till virtually all programs have Vista compatibility.

That will never happen, I can guarantee. I still run programs that are barely compatible with XP, and have some are are completely incompatible. Darn you, Home Design software!

[Comp Guy]

At least a lot of open-source software keeps up, since it's updated a lot!