Windows Vista Pretty Much Sucks

[Junk Parts]

Had to do it so I done it. Just put Windows 7 ultimate on this dog. Yes Sir! P4 2.4, 512 megs of ram with an ATI 7000 something junk Video card. Its running it somewhat I guess....LOL My Dell Dimension 4550 running Windows 7.

[bgavin]

Check your Task Manager... you still have a few megs left to do some work.
I have W7 running in a VM, and it only eats about 323mb.

[Junk Parts]

Couldn't do much of anything with W7. Gave it the Axe last night, and I'm back on Xp Home. I also couldn't find most any setting that I wished to change in W7. If I could have gotten it to look and act somewhat like Xp I may have played with it a few days. As it is, if vista is anything like W7 they both suck big peperoni's!!!!!!!

[bgavin]

Vista can be made tolerable by completely disabling the UAC component that chronically begs for permission to do...

We have gotten along just fine from Win 3.1 through WinXP without UAC, thank you. Unless you have some compelling reason for Vista/Win7, avoid it.

Buy a Mac.

[acstech]

Try Linux first. Not just Ubuntu either.

Mac? Excuse me for a minute...

[KeriJane]

Originally Posted by Junk Parts

Couldn't do much of anything with W7. Gave it the Axe last night, and I'm back on Xp Home. I also couldn't find most any setting that I wished to change in W7. If I could have gotten it to look and act somewhat like Xp I may have played with it a few days. As it is, if vista is anything like W7 they both suck big peperoni's!!!!!!!

Hi JunkParts!

Having dabbled with Windows Seven a bit, I feel that it is a VAST IMPROVEMENT over V(bleep!)sta for both performance and usability.

It is different than XP, but you can eventually get past that.
Great Idea-> Discontinue the most popular and profitable OS of all time and replace it with something vastly different in layout that requires learning it all over again!

Maybe your older system is just not strong enough for Seven? It is still based upon V(bleep!)sta which is probably the biggest resource hog of an OS of all time.

That article I read eons ago was (eventually) right.... the future belongs to UNIX!

Get some Linux or buy a Mac! (Leopard is a certified UNIX OS)
Mac User
Keri

Thinking of changing my avatar to this:

[bgavin]

So far, Windows 7 looks and behaves almost exactly like Windows Vista. It performs almost exactly like Vista. And it breaks all sorts of things that used to work just fine under Vista. In other words, Microsoft's follow-up to its most unpopular OS release since Windows Me threatens to deliver zero measurable performance benefits while introducing new and potentially crippling compatibility issues.

Randall Kennedy, InfoWorld
November 2008

[acstech]

Has it changed since November 2008?

[Per Hansson]

Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinion

Mine differs from his tho :P

[bgavin]

Win7 is slated for Christmas delivery this year.
The latest press shows MS is still uncommitted on its upgrade policy, but is leaning toward cheap/free upgrades for all Vista purchases up through the end of this year.

If Win7 remains consumer oriented (movies, digital rights, etc), the business community will give it the finger once again. XP volume licenses do not expire, so I doubt they will throw them away just because MS says "no more support."

Evidently the UAC is tightly bound to the architecture. Disabling UAC in Win7 seems to be causing problems that were not present in Vista. IMO, these extra ordinary steps taken in the OS to protect the user from himself are a dead end.

It seems that a home Proxy Server (linux) is a far more intelligent solution to protect users from the Internet. You can vscan, cache, mailscan, and filter web pages on the proxy server, then forward to the user. This can be a seriously large disk capacity machine, that Windows users can access for storage/backup via SAMBA.

[jpdoe]

bgavin is right about the power of a linux proxy. If used for light web browsing, even Windows 98 will survive for months if protected that way.

[NxB]

I went from 95 to 98se to win2k. I never really went for XP. It was just 2k with an extra theme. XP Pro seems pretty solid but if you compare it with windows 2000 its a bit slower. Try both on a PIII with 512mb of ram and you will notice right away.

Some software doesn't like windows 2000 now and refuses to install. Its a bit dated but the only real choice besides linux for older machines.

With vista the problem with XP home vs pro got magnified 100x. Ultimate is an OK os. If you install the norton UAC replacement and have the muscle to run it then you basically have a gussied up XP. The other versions seem to both remove functionality and make the system less responsive.

If I want pretty effects and compatibility problems with WINDOWS apps, I'll just run linux and use wine. It has more glitter and actually runs on less than 2gb of ram. It seems the whole goal of vista was to harass you with pop-ups and prevent you from changing system settings to do what you want.

[bgavin]

One prime reason for the forced migration away from Win2000 is .Net 3.5 won't run on it.

Everybody is writing "managed code" these days, due to the complexity of writing native code. Dot-Net is interpreted, and does the heavy lifting for you. This also applies to WDM device drivers, which are scary enough for top notch coders, and intimidate the snot out of the script kiddies. MS has released WDF as a simplified platform (wrapper) to hide the onerous details of writing to WDM.

Of course, there is a performance penalty using interpreted code, due to the extra layer and associated context switching. But, if you have to get an app out the door yesterday, it does simplify things a lot.

I'd be surprised if Dot-net runs on WINE. Somebody with experience, please post on this.

[jpdoe]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework

The third-party Mono Project, sponsored by Novell, has been developing an open source implementation of the ECMA standards that define the .NET Framework, as well as most of the other non-ECMA standardized libraries in Microsoft's .NET. The Mono implementation is meant to run on Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X, BSD, HP-UX, and Windows platforms. Mono includes the CLR, the class libraries, and compilers for C# and VB.NET. The current version supports all the APIs in version 2.0 of Microsoft's .NET

[bgavin]

Amazing.

The .Net wrapper hides the gory details of talking directly to the lower level API. Since these are Windows-specific, I wonder how broken this is all going to get when translated to the Linux APIs.

I don't hold much faith in this sort of stuff working smoothly. Emulators have been problematic since my early days at IBM. I doubt anything has changed, especially considering the huge complexity of the WDM model.

As long as the major business apps such as Quickbooks continues to go down the .Net road, they will be confined to the Windows platform. I have no doubt that v3.5 of .Net was brought about to keep the open source wolves away from the MS door. MS is not above increased proprietary code to keep their installed user bas.

[RJARRRPCGP]

Originally Posted by bgavin

I spent 4 hours on the Home Basic edition. What a pig. It is incompatible with a wide variety of stuff, plus slow as hell.

AMD 3200/64 processor, Dell E-series box. Not enough memory at 512mb, but still in the black if opening a web browser.

No Outlook Express
Replacement "Windows Mail" will import some OE files, not others.
No NTBackup
Built in Backup/Restore will not read NTBackup BKF files.
Won't install Quicken 2005 Deluxe at all
Will install Quicken 2005 Basic, but you have to click the data file first.
Refuses McAfee Enterprise 8.0i
Installs McAfee Enterprise 8.5i OK
Office Updates not supported. You must opt-in "Window Updater" instead.

And the most irritating thing is, just like the Mac commercial, it asks your permission for EVERY DAMN THING it does. Truly amazing. I equate this piece of shit with New Coke.

I figure when the Mac will run MS Office and Quickbooks Pro, flawlessly, it is gonna beat Windows ass. FTR, I am not a Mac fan (nor disparager).

Some software, including McAfee 8.0, it may not be Windows' fault. It may just be the stupid version checking and throws a hissy fit when a different version number is reported or different Windows name is reported by Windows.

[MXM]

hey, wel i have not read this entire thread yet but i wanted to add my opinion too... windows vista definetly SUCKS.

peace.

[stj]

i love these threads,

i'm reading & posting this on a k6-2-500 with 256mb ram
it runs 24/7 and is faster than win7 on a 64bit system!

it's my browsing & fileserver box - running mandriva 2006 Linux.
with KDE3 & Opera.

no viirus/spyware junk - because there is no virus & spyware threat.
no firewall, because there are no open ports other than the ones i'm using.


if microsoft designed a prison, they would fit the doorframes, and leave out the doors.
and fit signs saying "no exit" instead!

[Junk Parts]

Does that SUCKOMETER come in sizes to fit Windows Vista and W7???? I already gave the one that fits old Dell PC's.

[c_hegge]

I hate both windows vistrash and 7 for 3 main reasons:

1. Memory usage is WAY too high. XP will run happily on 512M, but with Vistrash or 7, you need at least 2GB before it's fast enough.

2. Windows XP is compatible with all my software, unlike windows 7 and vistrash

3. The windows firewall on vistrash and 7 blocks the windows updates!!!!