Why do people hate Vista?

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: barryng
It is indeed Vista's fault! The XP systems we are using on our other machines are not broken. They are reliable and fast. Because of Vista, XP support will be a thing of the past in the not too distant future. Therefore, I will be forced to upgrade all our machines to Vista. This in turn will force us to trash hardware that works well and supports our needs. I agree HP could provide much better driver support but this would not be an issue if I could continue to use an operating system that functions just fine.

Also Vista operates significantly slower than XP and, maddeningly, no matter what I do, I do not have complete access to the folders and files on my own computer. We do not run games, mostly we use internet, email, real estate apps, digital photo apps, and MS Office applications. The Vista machine takes much longer to boot, and application take longer to load. In addition, we found one specialized real estate app that is not compatible with Vista and no upgrade is available.

In other words, XP is not broken so I now resent having to spend hard earned money on new peripherals we must have. Until the advent of the current edition of XP there was always a reason to eventually upgrade due to stability and usability issues. Every one of these issues has been finally resolved with XP so any change now costs us time and money for no obvious gain. So Mem, regardless of your thoughts, you cannot change the fact that I hate the GD thing because it costs me money and makes life harder on us, with nothing obvious to gain.

Here is the bottom line. MS has legitimate business reasons to periodically roll out new products (i.e. Vista). We have legitimate business reasons for not upgrading anything unless there is a valid reason to do so. Vista costs us unnecessary money for new hardware, limits how we can manipulate files between our computers, and costs more time than XP. The subject of this thread is "Why do people hate Vista?". That is why I hate it. Of course we will be forced to live with it but right now I cannot see what benefit I am getting from it, compared to what we have now.

According to Microsoft, XP will be supported until 2014. So, if your peripherals do not work with Vista, then why would you bother switching until 2014? By that time all your peripherals will be past their life cycle and replaced with ones that will probably support both Vista and Windows Seven.

Windows XP Life Cycle

 

[Earfoam]

Vista better than XP for me. No performance problems that bother me. A couple of things are necessary though, performance hardware and OS tweaking.

 

[toadeater]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

reinstalling Vista seems too much like hard work - and same effort as going back to XP ;-)

It's actually a lot less work because Vista comes with drivers for most recent hardware, unlike XP which is a huge PITA because nothing works out of the box.

http://driverpacks.net/DriverPacks/

 

[Nothinman]

http://driverpacks.net/DriverPacks/

And you still have to slipstream those into a custom install disc which is more work than is required for Vista or Linux. And call me crazy but I don't like trusting drivers downloaded from random 3rd party sources.

 

[Lorne]

Though not a Vista user most complaints Ive seen are a driver issue that the MFG stopped or gave poor support for there product.
All this is the same arguenment that we've had since going from Win 3.x to 95 to 98 to 98SE to 98ME to XP, Nothing has changed.
As with all OS changes and with many not liking changes this will always be the case through out the OS evolutionary changes, I see this same thing going on in video games when a second version comes out and some nutjob (hypocrocy) liked his control keys set as ESDFC insted of the norm WASDX (Gamers know what that means).

I personally have stayed with XPsp2 for a few reason, One being bad software support for some programs which isnt Vista's fault at all.
I had an identical system as a friend and we both seen major slow downs in the gaming area, Not Vista's fault as we went through the same thing going to XP from ME.
Im sure after awhile I will migrate to Vista as I have done with most OS's in the past, Others will follow, It just takes time.




I personaly still miss the two sided file manager from the Win3.x and Amiga Diskmanager, But as with evolution you have to take the gains with the loses.

 

[Modelworks]

Right now I see no need for me to upgrade to vista.
My applications work well in xp x64 and all my hardware works.
Now if my applications change to requiring vista, or vista is able to make my computer faster, then I will upgrade.
Right now though I see no need to upgrade, just for the sake of upgrading.

And its that way with lots of businesses, if what you have works, you don't mess with it

 

[ChronoReverse]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Right now I see no need for me to upgrade to vista.
My applications work well in xp x64 and all my hardware works.
Now if my applications change to requiring vista, or vista is able to make my computer faster, then I will upgrade.
Right now though I see no need to upgrade, just for the sake of upgrading.

And its that way with lots of businesses, if what you have works, you don't mess with it

And that's the way it should be.

 

[Drsignguy]

Just remember when XP Pro X64 first came out. Nothing! Drivers were far and few between. Now all is much better. Vista on the other hand, is better than expected by my personal view. So the architecture of X64 has increased itself in popularity, not only from the manufacturer but the consumer as well.

 

[Zebo]

Old thread but I hate Vista for same reason I hated and still hate XP - too much security alerts and clicking - too phisher Price looking,too much MS branded multimedia integration and automation (e.g autoplay), too much settings and registry tweaking to make look and function streamlined like win2k. I will need Vista someday like I needed XP last year for some game - titan quest I think - and don't look forward to 3-4 hours of hacking the box and many more hours learning how to just to play something. MS should release a no frills version or something.

 

[C1]

If you research VISTA user experience, you'll find that it can work great for possibly as much as 25% of reported users. For 30% of users VISTA is just OK, but for the remainer percentage of users the reports are negative. I gave VISTA a fair shake of two month rigorous trial (multiple new installs, tweaked, non-tweaked, etc.). The conclusion for ME is to stay away from VISTA. My advice is that if your a power user doing a lot of multitasking, large file management & transfers then WINXP is a better choice. However, for simple (one at a time task users doing simple email or web surfing) I recommend VISTA especially if they are students. The fact of the matter is that WINXP is being replaced & that's that. So to be technologically up to date invest in & learn VISTA.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: C1
If you research VISTA user experience, you'll find that it can work great for possibly as much as 25% of reported users. For 30% of users VISTA is just OK, but for the remainer percentage of users the reports are negative. I gave VISTA a fair shake of two month rigorous trial (multiple new installs, tweaked, non-tweaked, etc.). The conclusion for ME is to stay away from VISTA. My advice is that if your a power user doing a lot of multitasking, large file management & transfers then WINXP is a better choice. However, for simple (one at a time task users doing simple email or web surfing) I recommend VISTA especially if they are students. The fact of the matter is that WINXP is being replaced & that's that. So to be technologically up to date invest in & learn VISTA.

uh...links?

I can link polls that show 8/10 love it

 

[Griffinhart]

Interesting comments on this weeks "Windows Weekly" about Vista uptake.

According to Gartner Research Business adoption rates of Windows Vista in it's first year is standing at 4.7% XP's business adoption rate was 4.7% after a year as well.

According to Gartner on the consumer front, Vista now has about a 21 or 22% install base after 16 to 18 months depending on what release date you pick, while XP at this point of its release had just over 17%. after two years. So it appears that Vista is selling at a noticeably quicker pace even accounting for the increase of the market size.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

Originally posted by: Griffinhart
Interesting comments on this weeks "Windows Weekly" about Vista uptake.

According to Gartner Research Business adoption rates of Windows Vista in it's first year is standing at 4.7% XP's business adoption rate was 4.7% after a year as well.

According to Gartner on the consumer front, Vista now has about a 21 or 22% install base after 16 to 18 months depending on what release date you pick, while XP at this point of its release had just over 17%. after two years. So it appears that Vista is selling at a noticeably quicker pace even accounting for the increase of the market size.

The reasoning is obvious though. Go to a computer store and buy a computer and (GASP!) Vista will be on it.

 

[Griffinhart]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender

Originally posted by: Griffinhart
Interesting comments on this weeks "Windows Weekly" about Vista uptake.

According to Gartner Research Business adoption rates of Windows Vista in it's first year is standing at 4.7% XP's business adoption rate was 4.7% after a year as well.

According to Gartner on the consumer front, Vista now has about a 21 or 22% install base after 16 to 18 months depending on what release date you pick, while XP at this point of its release had just over 17%. after two years. So it appears that Vista is selling at a noticeably quicker pace even accounting for the increase of the market size.

The reasoning is obvious though. Go to a computer store and buy a computer and (GASP!) Vista will be on it.

And that is different from XP how? When you went to a store and got a computer (GASP!) XP was on it!

Even if you just look at business adoption of Vista, it is doing at least as well as XP did and not simply because computers come with it on. For business PCs XP has been offered throughout most of Vistas existence.

Taking a look at Lenovo and Dell products right now will show that XP is still an option on many of their PC's and Laptops. Especially business versions.

The significance isn't that Vista is selling copies. It's that it is doing as good as XP did in Business and Better over all despite a huge anti-Vista sentiment out there and while there have been plenty of available machines for sale with XP instead of Vista.

 

[Genx87]

Vista is a double edged sword in the business world. On one hand you have an OS that clears up some of the issues from XP. On the other there are driver and application compatibility issues.

It is a matter of waiting these out though. I personally like Vista at home. But in the work place it has been iffy at best. But it will get better once we get some business units to upgrade their software.

 

[Griffinhart]

For what it's worth... ExtremeTech just released a new gaming comparison of Vista and XP with the new service packs.

http://www.extremetech.com/art.../0,2845,2302495,00.asp

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: Griffinhart
For what it's worth... ExtremeTech just released a new gaming comparison of Vista and XP with the new service packs.

http://www.extremetech.com/art.../0,2845,2302495,00.asp

Nice link,btw its what I have experienced going from XP to Vista in gaming,basically can't tell any difference.

I think the last page says it all.

Final Thoughts
If you were expecting a huge drop in performance as your eyes scanned from the XP to the Vista results, well, surprise! As many a tech analyst predicted, Windows Vista's gaming performance conundrum has largely been solved, and it was mainly due to early graphics drivers.

In fact, I'd been planning to run a few other gaming tests, but the results from these were so uninteresting that further work didn't seem merited. Love it or hate it, Vista is performing far better than it used to.

Game performance, it seems, has been exorcised from your concern when choosing a Microsoft operating system. That leaves a few other factors, of course: stability, responsiveness, eye candy, price, DirectX version, and a few other odds and ends.

It took about a year and a half, but the performance gap between Vista and its forerunner has finally evaporated.

You can bet the die hard XP users will find something else to complain about.

 

[turrican2097]

Originally posted by: Mem You can bet the die hard XP users will find something else to complain about.

90% of PC users are not XP die hard. They just don't care. If they buy a new computer they will use Vista. If not, they will keep using XP. Simple

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: turrican2097

Originally posted by: Mem You can bet the die hard XP users will find something else to complain about.

90% of PC users are not XP die hard. They just don't care. If they buy a new computer they will use Vista. If not, they will keep using XP. Simple

Its clear I'm not referring to general users,you only have to see the FUD that has been spread about Vista by the die hard XP fans,anyway you can bet samething(FUD etc) will happen with Windows 7 and 8 just like it did with XP etc..

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Mem

Originally posted by: turrican2097

Originally posted by: Mem You can bet the die hard XP users will find something else to complain about.

90% of PC users are not XP die hard. They just don't care. If they buy a new computer they will use Vista. If not, they will keep using XP. Simple

Its clear I'm not referring to general users,you only have to see the FUD that has been spread about Vista by the die hard XP fans,anyway you can bet samething(FUD etc) will happen with Windows 7 and 8 just like it did with XP etc..

Count on it. There are a lot of luddites in the tech world ironically.

 

[Bateluer]

How much you want to bet that when Windows 7 is released, the same people who are die hard XP fans will suddenly become die hard Vista fans, refusing to upgrade to Windows 7, toting its high system requirements, cost, incompatibilities, etc.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
How much you want to bet that when Windows 7 is released, the same people who are die hard XP fans will suddenly become die hard Vista fans, refusing to upgrade to Windows 7, toting its high system requirements, cost, incompatibilities, etc.

I can probably even tell you which users here will be doing that

 

[ChronoReverse]

Final Thoughts
If you were expecting a huge drop in performance as your eyes scanned from the XP to the Vista results, well, surprise! As many a tech analyst predicted, Windows Vista's gaming performance conundrum has largely been solved, and it was mainly due to early graphics drivers.

In fact, I'd been planning to run a few other gaming tests, but the results from these were so uninteresting that further work didn't seem merited. Love it or hate it, Vista is performing far better than it used to.

Game performance, it seems, has been exorcised from your concern when choosing a Microsoft operating system. That leaves a few other factors, of course: stability, responsiveness, eye candy, price, DirectX version, and a few other odds and ends.

It took about a year and a half, but the performance gap between Vista and its forerunner has finally evaporated.

The short memories people have. The same thing happened when going from Win98=>WinXP.

 

[turrican2097]

Originally posted by: Mem
Its clear I'm not referring to general users,you only have to see the FUD that has been spread about Vista by the die hard XP fans,anyway you can bet samething(FUD etc) will happen with Windows 7 and 8 just like it did with XP etc..

OK sorry, I see it now

I've used Vista on one of my PCs, and also saw it's page on Wikipedia. It's a nice OS
It's just that the release doesn't match the upgrade cycles of the PCs that matter to me.

OTOH If a machine is sold with Vista, it's certified for it and with working drivers. I really miss the point of downgrading those machines to XP.

 

[Kabob]

From a much simpler standpoint I don't like Vista because (IMHO) it takes alot more steps to do the same thing as it did in XP. Maybe it's just that I haven't learned the system in the year I've owned it (I'll admit it's my wife's laptop that I rarely use while I use XP multiple times every day).

I've got more gripes with the new Office than anything though...