Before you upgrade to Vista

Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".

No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
blitz on Vista over the past year:

PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html

WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns

CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm

As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
(which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
some DirectX 10 game applications.

All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
(in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
and mist, but not core.

Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
keep the discussion here where it belongs.

thank you for giving this testimony.. and you are 100% correct..

Vista is a bad lemon



"RMZ" <> wrote in message
news:13efc247-1e22-4594-bab3-...
> Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
> lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".
>
> No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
> is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
> blitz on Vista over the past year:
>
> PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html
>
> WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns
>
> CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm
>
> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
> some DirectX 10 game applications.
>
> All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
> (in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
> answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
> of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
> seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
> and mist, but not core.
>
> Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
> keep the discussion here where it belongs.

Your right! We still use Windows XP!
"RMZ" <> wrote in message
news:13efc247-1e22-4594-bab3-...
> Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
> lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".
>
> No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
> is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
> blitz on Vista over the past year:
>
> PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html
>
> WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns
>
> CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm
>
> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
> some DirectX 10 game applications.
>
> All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
> (in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
> answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
> of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
> seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
> and mist, but not core.
>
> Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
> keep the discussion here where it belongs.

No problems here!

"RMZ" wrote:

> Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
> lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".
>
> No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
> is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
> blitz on Vista over the past year:
>
> PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html
>
> WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns
>
> CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm
>
> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
> some DirectX 10 game applications.
>
> All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
> (in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
> answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
> of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
> seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
> and mist, but not core.
>
> Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
> keep the discussion here where it belongs.
>

RMZ wrote:

> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
> some DirectX 10 game applications.

So, you've got some dodgy hardware and blame Vista?

" non flammable on XP" <> wrote in message
news:4782c447$...
> thank you for giving this testimony.. and you are 100% correct..
>
> Vista is a bad lemon

You are a bad lemon. You flunked elementary school and you are a complete
jerk. Moron. You know nothing about computers. The best you can do is
play with an etch-a-sketch.

Just FYI

>
>
>
> "RMZ" <> wrote in message
> news:13efc247-1e22-4594-bab3-...
>> Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
>> lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".
>>
>> No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
>> is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
>> blitz on Vista over the past year:
>>
>> PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
>> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html
>>
>> WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
>> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns
>>
>> CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
>> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm
>>
>> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
>> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
>> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
>> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
>> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
>> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
>> some DirectX 10 game applications.
>>
>> All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
>> (in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
>> answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
>> of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
>> seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
>> and mist, but not core.
>>
>> Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
>> keep the discussion here where it belongs.
>
>

On Jan 7, 8:20 pm, "HeyBub" <hey...@gmail.com> wrote:
> RMZ wrote:
> > As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
> > heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
> > cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
> > sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
> > settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
> > (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
> > some DirectX 10 game applications.
>
> So, you've got some dodgy hardware and blame Vista?

No, it wasn't the hardware in at least two of the cases. The GeForce
7600 GS worked in an XP box I had without showing the color contrast
issues it had with Vista.... the sound card the same. So it is a case
of Vista drivers, which ironicly are suppose to be better.

warning to all readers.. this poster is called doris and is mentaly
unstable..

ignore her

"Spanky deMonkey" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> " non flammable on XP" <> wrote in message
> news:4782c447$...
>> thank you for giving this testimony.. and you are 100% correct..
>>
>> Vista is a bad lemon
>
> You are a bad lemon. You flunked elementary school and you are a complete
> jerk. Moron. You know nothing about computers. The best you can do is
> play with an etch-a-sketch.
>
> Just FYI
>
>>
>>
>>
>> "RMZ" <> wrote in message
>> news:13efc247-1e22-4594-bab3-...
>>> Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
>>> lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".
>>>
>>> No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
>>> is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
>>> blitz on Vista over the past year:
>>>
>>> PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
>>> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html
>>>
>>> WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
>>> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns
>>>
>>> CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
>>> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm
>>>
>>> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
>>> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
>>> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
>>> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
>>> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
>>> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
>>> some DirectX 10 game applications.
>>>
>>> All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
>>> (in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
>>> answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
>>> of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
>>> seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
>>> and mist, but not core.
>>>
>>> Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
>>> keep the discussion here where it belongs.
>>
>>
>

Once upon a time, in 1995...

Again in 96, with NT 4.0

Then there was that 2000 fiasco.

Windows ME?

Windows XP was a total disaster when it came out.
Until the first service pack, people were cursing for ever
having left 98 SE behind.

So much for short term memory loss. Every time MS releases a
new software. Out of all I have ever tried, Vista initial
release has been the most stable, and the most functional.

After tweaks, not one issue. Not one. I can't wait to see the first
service pack.

But, knowing my luck, it'll break something.
Then, I'll be complaining too.

Curt


"RMZ" <> wrote in message
news:13efc247-1e22-4594-bab3-...
> Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
> lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".
>
> No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
> is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
> blitz on Vista over the past year:
>
> PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html
>
> WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns
>
> CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm
>
> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
> some DirectX 10 game applications.
>
> All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
> (in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
> answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
> of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
> seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
> and mist, but not core.
>
> Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
> keep the discussion here where it belongs.

"RMZ" <> wrote in message
news:13efc247-1e22-4594-bab3-...
> Bill Gates went on record today saying looking back 1-year at Vista "a
> lot of companies would say it's the best product of the year".

He is the greediest "economic with the truth" amongst all of them
in Redmond. Just look at the prices of MS products which
sell unfinished products for the price of complete one.

>
> No Blll, we love ya and wish we had 1% of your wealth but the reality
> is most people would say the opposite, here's a sampling of the media
> blitz on Vista over the past year:
>
> PC World labeled it "#1 Disapointing product of the year"
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14...s/article.html
>
> WIRED magazine placed it #6 on their "heartbreaking gadgets of 2007"
> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/gadgetr..._Top10Letdowns
>
> CNET-CRAVE placed it #10 on it's Terrible products of 2007 list
> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39...3700-10,00.htm
>
> As a Vista owner for a bit over a week now I can tell you whole
> heartedly I wish I had Windows XP back. I've been through 3 graphic
> cards (cards with 32-bit Vista drivers available mind you) and two
> sound cards only to have had problems with all of them. I finally
> settled for motherboard based sound and the ATI 2600 HD Pro card
> (which even with the latest drivers has strange 'tearing' effect on
> some DirectX 10 game applications.
>
> All in all the answer to your question IS VISTA WORTH THE UPGRADE is
> (in spite of what some in this newsgroup will claim), for most the
> answer is a very firm NO. I'm considering paying $150 for an OEM copy
> of Windows XP Pro because it's faster and just runs more stable it
> seems, albeit without the bells and whistles of VISTA which are hit
> and mist, but not core.
>
> Please do not private e-mail me regarding this post, if you must reply
> keep the discussion here where it belongs.