Is MS Vista such a huge turn off that people (me) should consider Apples?

[dawks]

Originally posted by: UTmtnbiker
I'm very unhappy with protected video path implemented at the hardware level with no workaround (as it's also tied to TPM at the chip level). I understand it's probably a small issue, but I'm starting to feel with all of the "rights" we're given, computing and what WE want to do data is slowly being eroded. This ties in with the tight integration between Vista and the hardware level (TPM again). I grant that my issues with this are in direct opposite view of my security concerns because TPM can ensure a more secure environment but with TPM and its output protection management system, there is the POTENTIAL of serious lockdowns if Hollywood/content creators strongly push for it.

As far as price goes...granted, you may not need the full edition, but don't you feel like you're being nickel and dimed on getting "features"? That bothers me. They're segmentizing the market even more to maximize profits. Do I understand why they're doing it? Sure. Am I happy with it? Not really.

No need to discuss security. It's a concern of mine that hasn't been proven out yet, but like I said, with the largest user base, it's gonna have the largest target.

Maybe I am getting bored with Windows and that's why I'm looking for a change. Part of my point is that I'm not "excited" about Vista like I was with XP. I'm happy to run XP until it dies but I'd sure like to see an alternative OS that gives me that warm tingly feeling down there.

Let me put it this way, if an OS provider like Microsoft or Apple wants new HD content to be playable on their new OS's (Windows Vista or OS/X) they are going to need to implement copy protection. This is not a Microsoft only issue. You can probably expect this to show up in OS/X 10.5.

If you want to blame someone for the copy protection or DRM, blame the MPAA, and the RIAA and the movie/music studios. This is not Microsofts fault, they are simply trying to comply with the industry.

I think Microsoft has every right to charge extra for additional features. And I think people have gotten far to complacent with the price of Windows. People need to realize all the things Windows can do for them, and consider how 10 years ago you needed to pay $30-50 for the web browser, and $30-50 for a media player, and $30-50 for anti spyware... and so on. These things are now included in the price of the OS. Along with many others. Software developers have families to feed too. Not just hardware makers.

I'd be interested to see if OS/X is really anymore 'secure' then Windows was prior to SP2. Apple developers haven't had to deal with security much, and don't have near as much experience fixing holes. It could very well be that OS/X is even more 'insecure' then older Windows code, and are simply riding on the fact that 'hackers' are less likely to attack them since their market share is so low. People are possibly putting far too much faith in OS/X in the security sense.

 

[loup garou]

Ah, so this is where this thread went!

I think MrChad and dawks covered the HDCP issue quite well, I'd just like to add if you're concerned about OS ties to hardware, google osx tpm since you're considering moving to Apple.

I don't believe the Windows market is becoming more segmented with Vista. We have equivalency with XP:

XP Home:Vista Home Basic
XP MCE:Vista Home Premium
XP Pro:Vista Business

And then we have new products. Ultimate is offered as a superset of all of these; something that never existed with XP. You're not losing any features per version that you had in XP. And then of course, there is Vista Enterprise, another edition which only adds features above and beyond any comparable XP product. But we really shouldn't concern ourselves with Enterprise anyways, as you are obviously a home user.

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: dawks

Originally posted by: UTmtnbiker
I'm very unhappy with protected video path implemented at the hardware level with no workaround (as it's also tied to TPM at the chip level). I understand it's probably a small issue, but I'm starting to feel with all of the "rights" we're given, computing and what WE want to do data is slowly being eroded. This ties in with the tight integration between Vista and the hardware level (TPM again). I grant that my issues with this are in direct opposite view of my security concerns because TPM can ensure a more secure environment but with TPM and its output protection management system, there is the POTENTIAL of serious lockdowns if Hollywood/content creators strongly push for it.

As far as price goes...granted, you may not need the full edition, but don't you feel like you're being nickel and dimed on getting "features"? That bothers me. They're segmentizing the market even more to maximize profits. Do I understand why they're doing it? Sure. Am I happy with it? Not really.

No need to discuss security. It's a concern of mine that hasn't been proven out yet, but like I said, with the largest user base, it's gonna have the largest target.

Maybe I am getting bored with Windows and that's why I'm looking for a change. Part of my point is that I'm not "excited" about Vista like I was with XP. I'm happy to run XP until it dies but I'd sure like to see an alternative OS that gives me that warm tingly feeling down there.

Let me put it this way, if an OS provider like Microsoft or Apple wants new HD content to be playable on their new OS's (Windows Vista or OS/X) they are going to need to implement copy protection. This is not a Microsoft only issue. You can probably expect this to show up in OS/X 10.5.

If you want to blame someone for the copy protection or DRM, blame the MPAA, and the RIAA and the movie/music studios. This is not Microsofts fault, they are simply trying to comply with the industry.

I think Microsoft has every right to charge extra for additional features. And I think people have gotten far to complacent with the price of Windows. People need to realize all the things Windows can do for them, and consider how 10 years ago you needed to pay $30-50 for the web browser, and $30-50 for a media player, and $30-50 for anti spyware... and so on. These things are now included in the price of the OS. Along with many others. Software developers have families to feed too. Not just hardware makers.

I'd be interested to see if OS/X is really anymore 'secure' then Windows was prior to SP2. Apple developers haven't had to deal with security much, and don't have near as much experience fixing holes. It could very well be that OS/X is even more 'insecure' then older Windows code, and are simply riding on the fact that 'hackers' are less likely to attack them since their market share is so low. People are possibly putting far too much faith in OS/X in the security sense.

Well said.

 

[Shawn]

I ran Vista for 3 months and have had ZERO DRM issues. However I dislike vista for other reasons (mainly its sluggishness on my system and several bugs). Once I get a new system and the bugs have been worked out I will definitely be upgrading. That'll probably be in 2 years though.

If you still don't want to use Vista just buy a laptop now that still has XP on it. Either that or buy a laptop later with vista and format with xp. I have a mac but I never use it. OS X is cool for about a week but the novelty wears off quickly and then you realize how much better windows is.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Shawn
I ran Vista for 3 months

Then you were on beta builds, RTM is much better.

 

[Shawn]

Originally posted by: bsobel

Originally posted by: Shawn
I ran Vista for 3 months

Then you were on beta builds, RTM is much better.

I've used RTM. Build 5728 was much better.

 

[stash]

Probably a driver issue.

 

[JasonCoder]

Vista == best msft os yet IMO. Don't want to pay for premium? Then don't. Home Ultimate is about the same as xp pro was with more features and of course more modern.

Re: DRM... it's reality. I'm down with voting with your wallet all the way but I think you're going to miss a nice OS.

 

[car3]

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: car3
yup its been downhill since 98se

:laugh:

You think 98SE is superior to XP?

not for newbies but otherwise yes

 

[Link19]

Originally posted by: car3

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: car3
yup its been downhill since 98se

:laugh:

You think 98SE is superior to XP?

not for newbies but otherwise yes

A flat out untrue statement. Windows XP is beyond and far superior for both newbies and technical professionals in every way possible from that POS Windows 98 OS. The same holds true for Windows 2000.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: car3

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: car3
yup its been downhill since 98se

:laugh:

You think 98SE is superior to XP?

not for newbies but otherwise yes

A flat out untrue statement. Windows XP is beyond and far superior for both newbies and technical professionals in every way possible from that POS Windows 98 OS. The same holds true for Windows 2000.

:laugh: I was wondering when you'd arrive.

 

[bsobel]

A flat out untrue statement. Windows XP is beyond and far superior for both newbies and technical professionals in every way possible from that POS Windows 98 OS. The same holds true for Windows 2000.

Agreed, just don't go over board and get yourself another vacation.

 

[batmang]

Originally posted by: UTmtnbiker
Subject says it all.

I'm very negative on Vista and all of the DRM stuff they've put in it that I'm seriously considering an Apple for my next laptop purchase. I'm also considering Linux, but I need some mainstream apps that aren't on Linux yet but are on both Apple and MS.

Yes...I know Apples are overpriced. My point is that Vista is such a letdown and I'm curious as to if other people are as disenchanted as me and are looking at alternatives.

My choices:

1. Look at Apple and OSX
2. Run XP until its legs give out
3. Look at Linux and run WINE or whatever the latest Windows emulator is

Anything else I'm missing? I should say that my game playing on PC's is dramatically decreasing. Playing much more console games and I foresee this trend continuing.

if you game, windows.
if you dont, linux.

the end.

 

[imported_Com80787]

First let me say I have used Windows exclusively since Windows 3.1.

Vista RTM is a major disapointment for me. It is at least 2 generations behind where it should be. The stability and general feel of the OS remind me of Windows ME. Fortunately with Windows ME I was able to dump it and move on to Windows 2000 which was a decent OS for the time.

I have overall been satisfied with Windows XP, but it is showing its age and I was very much looking forward to Vista. Unfortunately Vista is a complete let down. Even more unfortunate is that unlike Windows ME I can't dump it and move to a decent (modern) Windows operating system.

How much of a let down do I consider Vista to be? Let's just say this... I have a Technet subscription and ten legal Vista activations at my disposal. I have used NONE of them and am currently investigating possible Linux distros to use as a primary OS.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: Com80787
Vista RTM is a major disapointment for me. It is at least 2 generations behind where it should be. The stability and general feel of the OS remind me of Windows ME. Fortunately with Windows ME I was able to dump it and move on to Windows 2000 which was a decent OS for the time.

How can anyone judge the stability of an operating system that was just released to manufacturers weeks ago? If you'll recall, Windows 2000 had more than its fair share of driver and stability issues when it was first released. It can take 6 months to a year (and sometimes longer) for manufacturers to get their acts together and stabilize drivers for a new platform. If you want to be on the cutting edge and use a brand new OS with beta drivers as your primary system, more power to you. But lets remember that there's more to system stability than Microsoft's code.

 

[imported_Com80787]

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: Com80787
Vista RTM is a major disapointment for me. It is at least 2 generations behind where it should be. The stability and general feel of the OS remind me of Windows ME. Fortunately with Windows ME I was able to dump it and move on to Windows 2000 which was a decent OS for the time.

How can anyone judge the stability of an operating system that was just released to manufacturers weeks ago? If you'll recall, Windows 2000 had more than its fair share of driver and stability issues when it was first released. It can take 6 months to a year (and sometimes longer) for manufacturers to get their acts together and stabilize drivers for a new platform. If you want to be on the cutting edge and use a brand new OS with beta drivers as your primary system, more power to you. But lets remember that there's more to system stability than Microsoft's code.

And this is exactly what I am talking about when I say 2 generations behind. Microsoft operating systems should be to the point that 3rd party software can not bring the entire OS down. I am not even talking about drivers. I ran some software for my TV card. It worked for a bit, then became unstable and brought the entire OS down with it. That is unacceptable when compared to the competition. You don't see that type of thing on linux. It was not a driver issue either, as all drivers were those that were installed by Vista. Now if Microsoft chose to bundle drivers that would bring down the OS in less than a few hours of use after install that is grossly irresponsible on their part.

I also experienced explorer crashes randomly. This was a clean install using ONLY Vista provided drivers. Not only that, but immediately after install was finished I put in my USB flash drive so I could transfer my fave places and other files. The MOMENT I clicked on the drives icon explorer crashed. This was within 10 minutes after the clean install completed.

It blows my mind that Microsoft released the OS in this state.

 

[stash]

That sure sounds like a driver issue to me. Just because Vista installs the driver doesn't mean it isn't a third-party and/or beta driver. Windows Update is and will host thousands of drivers for all sorts of hardware companies, and those drivers are installed automatically if you have automatic updates enabled (by default).

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: Com80787

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: Com80787
Vista RTM is a major disapointment for me. It is at least 2 generations behind where it should be. The stability and general feel of the OS remind me of Windows ME. Fortunately with Windows ME I was able to dump it and move on to Windows 2000 which was a decent OS for the time.

How can anyone judge the stability of an operating system that was just released to manufacturers weeks ago? If you'll recall, Windows 2000 had more than its fair share of driver and stability issues when it was first released. It can take 6 months to a year (and sometimes longer) for manufacturers to get their acts together and stabilize drivers for a new platform. If you want to be on the cutting edge and use a brand new OS with beta drivers as your primary system, more power to you. But lets remember that there's more to system stability than Microsoft's code.

And this is exactly what I am talking about when I say 2 generations behind. Microsoft operating systems should be to the point that 3rd party software can not bring the entire OS down. I am not even talking about drivers. I ran some software for my TV card. It worked for a bit, then became unstable and brought the entire OS down with it. That is unacceptable when compared to the competition. You don't see that type of thing on linux. It was not a driver issue either, as all drivers were those that were installed by Vista. Now if Microsoft chose to bundle drivers that would bring down the OS in less than a few hours of use after install that is grossly irresponsible on their part.

I also experienced explorer crashes randomly. This was a clean install using ONLY Vista provided drivers. Not only that, but immediately after install was finished I put in my USB flash drive so I could transfer my fave places and other files. The MOMENT I clicked on the drives icon explorer crashed. This was within 10 minutes after the clean install completed.

It blows my mind that Microsoft released the OS in this state.

Maybe if you get involved with OS development and what goes along with it you will understand. Until then, find a way out of your box.

 

[RyanGrob]

Originally posted by: InlineFive


Maybe if you get involved with OS development and what goes along with it you will understand. Until then, find a way out of your box.

You shouldn't have to get involved with OS development when you're paying upwards of $400. Sorry. You pay for something you expect final; not half assed. If you want to be okay with Microsoft never being able to really release a stable version of Windows and having to wait 6 months to a year, cheers to you. But for others who wish to get what they pay for, it's inexcusable. I can pretty much state OS X works out of the box and pretty damn stable upon release. I use both a PC and OS X and much rather prefer OS X. Windows is just there for games

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: RyanGrob

Originally posted by: InlineFive


Maybe if you get involved with OS development and what goes along with it you will understand. Until then, find a way out of your box.

You shouldn't have to get involved with OS development when you're paying upwards of $400. Sorry. You pay for something you expect final; not half assed. If you want to be okay with Microsoft never being able to really release a stable version of Windows and having to wait 6 months to a year, cheers to you. But for others who wish to get what they pay for, it's inexcusable. I can pretty much state OS X works out of the box and pretty damn stable upon release. I use both a PC and OS X and much rather prefer OS X. Windows is just there for games

It's a lot easier to keep your operating system stable when you run on a controlled hardware platform. Macs only come in so many configurations; there are lot less unknown drivers to foul things up.

 

[dawks]

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: RyanGrob

Originally posted by: InlineFive


Maybe if you get involved with OS development and what goes along with it you will understand. Until then, find a way out of your box.

You shouldn't have to get involved with OS development when you're paying upwards of $400. Sorry. You pay for something you expect final; not half assed. If you want to be okay with Microsoft never being able to really release a stable version of Windows and having to wait 6 months to a year, cheers to you. But for others who wish to get what they pay for, it's inexcusable. I can pretty much state OS X works out of the box and pretty damn stable upon release. I use both a PC and OS X and much rather prefer OS X. Windows is just there for games

It's a lot easier to keep your operating system stable when you run on a controlled hardware platform. Macs only come in so many configurations; there are lot less unknown drivers to foul things up.

Exactly. OS/X ships with very few drivers. While Vista on the other had has something like 19,500 drivers (not sure if they are all on the DVD or not), and will have more like 22,000+ via Windows Update when Vista is released to the public. These are all tested and verified by Microsoft. They don't have to do this, but are, so your $400 OS will work properly.

In the example of a TV tuner, how well do the Linux drivers work? How about the OS/X drivers? Or do those even exist? How about media software? Is there anything as complete or comprehensive and as easy to setup and use as Windows Media Center for Linux or OS/X?

Microsoft has made a great effort to improve stability by moving as much of the driver system to user-mode. But for compatibility sake, and in an effort to prevent many smaller companies from being driven out of business (by having to do very expensive driver rewrites), Microsoft has had to make some concessions with WDM to help them out. If a driver is crashing the system, its not Microsoft's often fault, but do everyone a favor and send the error report so either Microsoft can fix it, or so they can notify the driver manufacturer so they can attempt to correct the problem. (Microsoft Error Reporting really does help)

 

[nortexoid]

I am still running DOS 5 on a 486SLC/33 and it's completely fine. No DRM issues at all. Incidentally, what is DRM? Well, there are no security issues on my machine, and I think all of the viruses for DOS 5.0 are now curable, and nobody is writing them anymore, so my computer is pretty darn safe, unlike these Windows and OS X platforms.

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: Link19

Originally posted by: car3

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: car3
yup its been downhill since 98se

:laugh:

You think 98SE is superior to XP?

not for newbies but otherwise yes

A flat out untrue statement. Windows XP is beyond and far superior for both newbies and technical professionals in every way possible from that POS Windows 98 OS. The same holds true for Windows 2000.

Wait, you're saying that XP is significantly better than XP? I laugh in your face. VISTA is just another windows XP, except it's taken a page from the apple book and has decided that form is more important than function. While I do strongly believe in compromise, VISTA is anything but a compromise, it's a complete disaster of an operating system and I'd say its development is much like the war in IRAQ, oddly enough...

 

[QuEeNyGuRl]

Been running Vista for two months now. It's alright. Some of the default high security settings are annoying though. Does it really need to prompt me if I really want to open Notepad or not? Most vendors do not officially have Vista drivers yet which is a pain. The default appearance for Vista is so ugly and bloated, I had to turn everything back to classic.

 

[masteraleph]

Originally posted by: goku

Wait, you're saying that XP is significantly better than XP? I laugh in your face. VISTA is just another windows XP, except it's taken a page from the apple book and has decided that form is more important than function. While I do strongly believe in compromise, VISTA is anything but a compromise, it's a complete disaster of an operating system and I'd say its development is much like the war in IRAQ, oddly enough...

Wait, you mean that hundreds of thousands of people have died as a result of Vista?

Rewritten TCP/IP stack, new security features, no kernel patching in the 64bit version, new (and really quite good) search capabilities, pre-caching regularly used programs, offloading GUI to the 3d card, new graphics subsystem, most subsystems aren't integral to the OS running (i.e. if they crash there is no automatic reboot)...should I keep going?

If Vista were a new Windows XP, old drivers would work on it. The fact that they don't, particularly the graphics drivers, should tell you that there is indeed something quite new.