Originally posted by: Arkaign
Originally posted by: dguy6789
It is sad when people continue to bash and bash Vista just because they hate Microsoft. When one can get past the hate of Microsoft and jealousy of Mr. Gates or whatever their problem with them is, they will realize that Vista is a good step in the right direction. Pretty much everyone who uses Vista prefers it over XP. Vista is more stable, more secure, and more user friendly than XP.
This is all wrong, take off the tinfoil hat buddy. I have great respect for Bill Gates, his hard work, and his charity foundation. I like most Microsoft Products, but I view them all independently, which is the only logical way of forming viewpoints. I've been using Microsoft operating systems since Dos 3.0, and have to be honest, they all have their ups and downs. Not to mention that some get better with a few updates, and some don't. When XP launched, it didn't make sense for most people, as it was basically 2000 with a facelift and better DX support. It was only after DX9 gaming became popularly supported and people's hardware became powerful enough that it truly became an outstanding OS. Vista has a good chance of evolving into something decent as well.
I own a computer shop in a mid-sized town, and the feedback on Vista has been uniformly negative. Sitting on the bench to my left is a new Gateway 5408 C2D box that someone brought in along with a retail WinXP Home package, with the instructions to get Vista "The hell off of my computer!". I get this 2-3 times a week now. My first efforts are to explain the differences in Vista, what UAC means, but usually they insist on getting rid of it.
Vista is technically better than ME, but in terms of what it really offers the average joe who just plays a game once in a while or browses the internet .. it just makes things needlessly confusing. Why spend so many years cultivating an interface layout only to abandon it purely for the pursuit of change.
In my opinion, which has echoed by most of my IT colleagues upon sharing, is that Vista and Office 07 are examples of an exaggerated attempt to make things seem different to justify the price. Move things around, hide things, but the same basic elements remain.
Probably the single largest issue that exists is UAC though, it nags the piss out of you at every turn. I'm not very confident that it will even come close to stemming the time against malware/spyware/etc.
And performance-wise, it's an absolute embarassment. I've had brand-new out of the box Intel Dual-Core premium notebooks, with 1gb DDR2, and Vista runs like petrified dog crap on them. Click start .. wait .. wait ... wait .... oh wow there's the start menu! Ditto with opening something like Word. There's just no excuse for a brand-new $1000 notebook to run so terribly. After formatting and loading XP, it's like night and day. Vista on 1gb runs like XP w/192mb. Or Win2k w/64mb. Or 98 w/16mb. Or 95 w/8mb. On my personal system, though it for whatever reason sees my 4gb as 3.25, it still seems notably more sluggish than my tuned XP install. I run 20 processes total on my XP install at most times, and there's almost zero lag in the interface or opening apps.
Anyway, please realize that genuine criticism of Vista can have absolutely nothing to do with Bill Gates or even Microsoft the corporation, but rather just the product itself. I have no problem with those who like it, but you have to realize that not everyone will.