I bought my desktop two months ago (AMD 3Ghz dual-core, 3GB ram), and it came with Vista. I like it so far. Looks much better visually and hasn't really slowed anything down yet. The popups don't bother me much.
Hmm, so making things easier for the masses isn't something a company should strive for? But I'd agree with most of your other post.
We just develop software, and Vista sucks. Widely recognized by professionals as a piece of cr*p. Ordered 25 laptops from Dell and they didn't even ask, just configured the quote with XP. There appears to be a big move to Macs from people you wouldn't expect... e.g. our CTO, a friend who's the president of a bank, and we hear of many others every week. My be a 'tipping point'; Apple stock may be cheap.
and then? what exactly changes after a few months give us some more technical details instead of just continuing to blindly say 'Vista sucks' I haven't had a problem with it since getting my new Dell laptop a couple months ago. I can see how it would run sluggishly on a low-end machine with all the Aero and Glass stuff turned on, but on high-end systems it's fine. don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a super leap forward ahead of XP...it's just prettier (and I admit I'm a graphics w**** in general)
well, simplistic doesn't always = easier . Just meant less options/command etc. I would prefer both "simplistic" & "advance" setting for the benefit of both. But i guess there is way too much reasons to avoid adding too much features for programs, since it will mean more work/testing (more $ spend), higher chances of bugs/exploit, and higher chances of messing your pc or whatever (for newbie) which lead to higher demand for customer support (more $ again). Thank god there is a huge community that provide freeware.
I was kidding dude, I've worked in I.T. for the past 10 years so I've been through the ups and downs of the Microsoft OS's. Vista is a freaking resource hog, but if you have a powerful machine to run it, it's not bad. My desktop handles it well, but it does crawl at times on my 1.86ghz/2gb laptop. I'm a web guy though, so I can deal with the performance issues since we get IIS 7 with Vista. That makes it all worth it. Although based on experience, the web admin in me also wants to say that developers are a prime example of people that don't know what they're doing.
I think you can do a quick google search and find a lot of good articles on Vista problems - from 'reputable' sources, not flamewars and such. There are clearly issues with Vista and it is a concern. Compatibility/driver issues (still), overall performance; the kinds of things that will sour most regular users. I think it'll be fine in the long run - maybe. But I think it's pretty obvious it's not just a few people flaming it for no reason.
I don't have Vista myself, but from friends and families(most of whom are programmers or at least computer savvy), feelings for vista range from "usable" to "switched back to XP". I don't think that's a good thing. I wonder how many people thought of Vista as "Wow, I'm so glad I got rid of XP for this"?
Same here. I had a couple of nagging issues, but one of the many patches I have downloaded fixed those.
Same here. I don't know what the fuss is about. I think these dudes with all these "i hate this" "i hate that" things are just being lazy and don't want to take the time to understand the way the new OS works. When Windows 95 first came out, nothing worked... then it did. Which reminds me: "When they opened Disneyland in 1956, nothing worked." - name that movie (difficulty: easy)
I just need a better selling point to get Vista beyond "it's pretty" Why would I want an OS that's a resource hog? Is there any justification at all for an OS that requires processors and memory on the high end of the market? I want to dedicate RAM and CPU/graphics power towards apps, not an OS. Call me crazy. Evan
Obviously Microsoft's top executives who are complaining about Vista are just too lazy to understand the way it works, too... "Now I have a $2100 email machine." - Microsoft Exec The worst thing about Vista is how driver support for a LOT of hardware sucks royally. Some of those executives were talking about how they purchased top-of-the-line printers, scanners etc. only to find that they wouldn't work on Vista. And the revelation that some of these manufacturers, particularly Intel, were given the "Vista Capable" label for their hardware regardless of specifications just to help them make their quarterly profit estimates is extremely telling. Microsoft cares about its customers. It's just, those customers are Intel & co., not you.
I bought new laptops and a new main desktop computer within the last several months, and they all came with Vista. I got the cheapest Dell laptop, and I was a bit concerned about Vista running on it, but it works fine. I haven't noticed it to be sluggish, etc. despite it not being a very high-spec computer and even running the "glass" and all that. My only problem is that it takes longer to for the wireless connection to get going than it did on my old XP Laptop. I wouldn't have upgraded to Vista from XP on my existing computers, but I don't have any issues with the stuff I use on Vista that came pre-installed on my new machines.
How do I turn all that resource-hogging crap off? I have 2 new desktops and a new laptop at home all with vista. I want to diable the "allow" nags and make the icons small, turn off any effects.
Vista is ok. I personally don't find ANY benefits from it though. Finding certain options are harder. The eye candy isn't that much prettier. It's a resource hog...so I turn off Aero...and it's the same thing as XP. BTW, I'm not crazy about the Ribbon GUI used in Office now either. I know they tried to simplify certain things, but I found it non-logical...fail.
The new Office ribbon GUI is another one of those things that has been almost universally panned -- a classic case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". For all the problems MS has had with windows over the years, Office has always been their strong suit. Until they decided to change everything.
