Poll: Is/was Vista really that bad?

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Mem

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Mem, I've got the following loaded, in the order that I installed :

(1)- Set bios on 790X to 'AHCI' for the Sata controller

You don't want to use the AMD AHCI driver because it is broken and harms performance. Uninstall that driver and use the Vista native AHCI driver as it performs much better than AMD's driver.

Also, Don't get your drivers from Gigabyte unless they are the latest version drivers from each company that provides components for the mobo. Instead go to the individual component manufactures web site and get them there. I'm betting your issues are from broken or outdated drivers being used.

I am using the Vista SP2 AHCI driver, but I had to enable AHCI in bios (was set to compatible/PATA)

Only drivers from Gigabyte are for audio and network, which are both current.

System is fast when things are opened, just takes time for the animations to take place. I'm spoiled by virtually instant response.

Arkaign did you check in Reliability and Performance monitor chart?...it gives you a graph of any issues (little red circle with white x) maybe a clue there to the issue you have,also don't forget to update your DX9.0C to latest version ie from here (March 2009) for all versions of Windows.

I would run CCleaner as well and give Superfetch a week at least to learn your PC user habbits,if you are overclocked try running at default speed for now and see if things improve.I presume you installed latest board chipset drivers?

The only applications that I've loaded are Nero 7.10

I used Nero in the past but found it became too bloated over the years, anyway I'm very happy with Ashampoo Burning Studio 9 it does all I need without any bloat.

I'll give those a shot! Thanks!

 

[Nothinman]

I have higher expectations, so I simply believe Vista could have been a whole lot lighter than it was. The system requirements to run it smoothly were just too high.

So you think you've could've implemented the same feature set with less code than MS did?

 

[Texun]

In a nut shell I will generalize and say I've had fewer problems and crashes with Vista than any other MS OS to date. I live in a microcosm compared to those of you who must deal with it daily, but it has been amazingly stable for me even though I had to bump up the hardware a little more to get the most out of it. I'm glad RAM was cheap when I did my upgrade!

 

[junfan77]

I can only comment on Vista at launch... UAC, Nvidia drivers, gaming performance, folder contents that had to "load", programs that HAD to be run as admin or in compatibility, ventrilo i'm looking at you..., and so on, yes Vista sucked, was it completely microsofts fault, of course not, but launch vista was horrible, i'm sure the majority of issues have been fixed though.

 

[MBM85]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I have higher expectations, so I simply believe Vista could have been a whole lot lighter than it was. The system requirements to run it smoothly were just too high.

So you think you've could've implemented the same feature set with less code than MS did?

No, but Microsoft can, which they have just done with Windows 7.

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: MBM85

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I have higher expectations, so I simply believe Vista could have been a whole lot lighter than it was. The system requirements to run it smoothly were just too high.

So you think you've could've implemented the same feature set with less code than MS did?

No, but Microsoft can, which they have just done with Windows 7.

It's easier once you have the template to work with ie Vista , if they had waited 2 years before releasing Vista whats to say it would not be more streamlined and tweaked like Win7 is,remember XP to Vista was a big change,look at Windows history from 3.11 up to Win7 you'll see it has become a lot more bloated due to added new features etc..not to meantion PCs have become a lot more sophiscated.


It'll be interesting to see how Win8 develops over time with an ET around 2011/12.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: nerp
I actually prefer Vista to 7 in many ways. I was so done and tired of XP when Vista came out. It was a blessing to me. And I've never understood the performance complaints. It has always run faster for me than XP. No chugging. Crap just pops open and always has. Superfetch is kickass. Maybe I just don't run crapware and bloaty junk. I'm pretty minimalist with my stuff.

The ONE thing about Vista that was borked for me was the very slow network file transfer speeds in the beginning. But that got fixed pretty quickly.

My experience also. In fact, things like window based searches etc are one reason I cannot stand to use XP any more. Vista has always been flawless for me. Well, as flawless as an OS can be lol

 

[Tarrant64]

You left out the 50/50 option.

Vista had some major issues sometimes, and other times it was great.

 

[nOOky]

I like Vista. I have 2 copies of Ultimate and 1 of Home Prem. on my laptop. I dual boot on one pc, but I never use XP anymore. I like Win 7, but I won't rush out to install it until the 1st service pack as I usually do with a new version. I also get it cheap from a relative who works at Microsoft, so that helps.
Vista's initial problems were usually from the hardware vendors inability to get decent drivers out soon enough. Whether it was a video card or all-in-one printer they took too long to develop decent drivers.
Memory being cheap Vista's memory hogginess is no longer an issue.

 

[VinDSL]

"NO" vote here!

I like Vista - still running my original (March 2007) install - patched and mod'ed, of course.

Never could understand the Vista-hater attitude... :laugh:

 

[capeconsultant]

Vista simply got a bad rap. I have installed it on many users computer, tweaked the usual bloatware etc, and never heard a peep from them again. Meaning, it works, and works well. I have used it for my main business, which is computer/web/outlook/photoshop/word/Quicken/Outlook/etc etc etc and it holds up just fine. Win7 is really Vista 2.0, or maybe 2.5, and I am sure I will love the heck out of it.

 

[VinDSL]

Originally posted by: capeconsultant
Win7 is really Vista 2.0, or maybe 2.5[...]

Or Vista 7, as I like to call it.

 

[Cogman]

I LOVE vista. I had my fears of installing it (Dang haters will make anyone pensive about installing it) but once I did I've never looked back. By far the smoothest running os I have ever had.

 

[ITPaladin]

Originally posted by: Fox5
Vista is very ram hungry, but that's about it. Oh, and it can hit the hard drive pretty heavy with all the indexing stuff it does.

But on a fast computer, (basically anything sold now), vista is pretty good.

I have a 64 bit vista ultimate disc around I may use for my Phenom x2.
I know you can turn off the indexing in XP. Are you able to do that with Vista?

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: ITPaladin

Originally posted by: Fox5
Vista is very ram hungry, but that's about it. Oh, and it can hit the hard drive pretty heavy with all the indexing stuff it does.

But on a fast computer, (basically anything sold now), vista is pretty good.

I have a 64 bit vista ultimate disc around I may use for my Phenom x2.
I know you can turn off the indexing in XP. Are you able to do that with Vista?

Yes.

 

[VinDSL]

Originally posted by: ITPaladin
I know you can turn off the indexing in XP. Are you able to do that with Vista?

Yeah, you can disable almost all the features, but...

I *think* this is one of the reasons Vista got a bad rap!

1. 1) XP users were pissed because they felt like Vista was forced on them.
   
   2) The location of everything changed, forcing ppl to unlearn everything they knew.
   
   3) The interface went from a cheery Teletubbie-look to a morbid, pale green, Matrix-look.
   
   4) The attitude became, "You wanna mess with me, you Microsoft mofos? Fine, I'll turn your Vista ass into XP!"

My *feeling* is, if you enjoy the XP experience, install XP...

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: ITPaladin

Originally posted by: Fox5
Vista is very ram hungry, but that's about it. Oh, and it can hit the hard drive pretty heavy with all the indexing stuff it does.

But on a fast computer, (basically anything sold now), vista is pretty good.

I have a 64 bit vista ultimate disc around I may use for my Phenom x2.
I know you can turn off the indexing in XP. Are you able to do that with Vista?

Yes, but Im not sure why you would. It runs in off time, and shuts down if CPU/memory are needed. It doesnt interfere with anything, and the benefits are outstanding.

IMHO.

 

[ChaiBabbaChai]

I blame the idiots who don't know how to turn off UAC for Vista's demise. On the flip-side, it's good that MS felt the flame under their arses to build a better OS even if Vista is better than XP in some respects.

Just FYI, I like Vista for my office tasks and XP for my DAW.

 

[DataCabbitKSW]

Nothinman, amen to your last statement. Windows will be with us for a long time. Windows 7 is just the latest and greatest. It certainly works better across a wider spectrum of gear right out of the box, but the problem will generally devolve into one of three categories: Poorly written programs, poorly written drivers, and user issues. Microsoft has been doing a lot to try to stem the first two (with SDKs, guidelines, testingframeworks, certification schemes, etc) but ultimately has little control over it. The last bit Microsoft has been trying to make a lot of headway on, to prevent easy mistakes and to guide the newer users and make the power-user's time more productive. However, they can't save a user from themself, and many just outright reject change.
Fleshconsumed, I'll agree having the up-one-level button is handy, but the arrows in the breadcrumb line (the address bar) seem to work pretty well as a replacement and are actually more functional. I've never had UAC ask twice for the same program or function, and Explorer never auto-closes on me when I eject a CD/DVD/BRD it either just shows the drive as now empty, or jumps to the drive above it (and I have burning enabled). I will totally agree with the owership and copying issues. There could be some steps taken to fix this, and I believe there have been in Windows 7 (I don't seem to have these issues there yet). I think there wer a few issues with your particular build, because most of those things I never ran into.
ITPaladin, you are absolutely able to turn off indexing in Vista. It removes some handy functionality and benefits (ike the autosearch from the start menu), but it is very doable.
For anybody who actually has problems with Vista, I suggest you try posting over to the official Windows Vista Support Forum located here http://tinyurl.com/d5r9v3 . The Microsoft devs and many really savvy folks are on there and can likely help to fix just about any issue you have run into.

 

[Maximilian]

Yes it was, due to a combination of factors with a few different companies/people to blame, but the blame game dosent solve problems. Bottom line it was a crap end user experience for a lot of people that offered nothing over XP. Its fine now and is less hassle than XP to set up but that rep from the early days will stick.

 

[Henny]

I've used Vista from day 1. Now I'm running Vista SP1 side by side with W7.

For some reason everyone flames Vista but loves W7. I just don't get it. The differences between these two OS's are very, very small.

So far no-one has been able to clearly articulate why W7 is superipor to Vista.

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: Henny
I've used Vista from day 1. Now I'm running Vista SP1 side by side with W7.

For some reason everyone flames Vista but loves W7. I just don't get it. The differences between these two OS's are very, very small.

So far no-one has been able to clearly articulate why W7 is superipor to Vista.

Any reason why not on SP2?....as to Win7 features ,info here.

 

[zerocool84]

I have Vista SP2 and W7 RC and I still use Vista more. I've only had Vista since November but it's been awesome.

 

[nyker96]

yes I think vista is really pretty slow. bad maybe not be very slow compare to win 7. after seeing win 7, I'd say just waiting for some software to be compatible then I'm switching.

 

[coloumb]

I like Vista - but most people I know hate it and choose to stick with XP. The ONLY thing I don't like about Vista is the lack of 64 bit drivers for my Minolta 2300W laster printer...

I may switch to Win7 eventually but only if I can snag a free legit copy [ie: MS seminar, online special, etc]. Yes..I'm a cheap bastard and have been since Windows ME [free copies for beta testing and/or free MS seminars].