Windows Vista - A dog's breakfast!

Discussion in 'Windows Vista Help' started by Dr. Bill, Mar 21, 2007.

  1. Dr. Bill

    Dr. Bill Guest

    http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus/blade/2007/02/28/vista-even-the-experts-are-giving-up-on-it/

    a.. It is unbelievable it took five years to achieve this and the results
    are disappointing to say the least.
    a.. Where are the OEM hardware manufacturers? I can’t believe it is taking
    so long for them to come up with Vista compliant drivers. Is it they
    suspected that Vista would be a dud?
    a.. For the amount of money people are spending for the new OS, I don’t
    think it is unreasonable for them to expect it to work. At least be on par
    with XP, or we had all hoped it would surpass XP. This does not seem to be
    the case.
     
    Dr. Bill, Mar 21, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. |
    http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus/blade/2007/02/28/vista-even-the-experts-are-giving-up-on-it/
    |
    | a.. It is unbelievable it took five years to achieve this and the results
    | are disappointing to say the least.
    | a.. Where are the OEM hardware manufacturers? I can’t believe it is taking
    | so long for them to come up with Vista compliant drivers. Is it they
    | suspected that Vista would be a dud?
    | a.. For the amount of money people are spending for the new OS, I don’t
    | think it is unreasonable for them to expect it to work. At least be on par
    | with XP, or we had all hoped it would surpass XP. This does not seem to be
    | the case.

    I would not even consider an "upgrade" at this point.
    Will all new PCs come with Vista preloaded or will we get a choice to stick
    with XP?

    Maybe Apple or Linux will come up with a viable alternative.
     
    Spencer ©¿©¬, Mar 23, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dr. Bill

    Moonbat Guest


    SuSE 10.2 with Beryl. Runs rings around the "Aero" desktop!
     
    Moonbat, Mar 24, 2007
    #3
  4. | On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:03:30 +0000, Spencer ©¿©¬ wrote:
    |
    | >
    | > | > |
    | >
    http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus/blade/2007/02/28/vista-even-the-experts-are-giving-up-on-it/
    | > |
    | > | a.. It is unbelievable it took five years to achieve this and the
    | > | results are disappointing to say the least.
    | > | a.. Where are the OEM hardware manufacturers? I can’t believe it is
    | > | taking so long for them to come up with Vista compliant drivers. Is it
    | > | they suspected that Vista would be a dud?
    | > | a.. For the amount of money people are spending for the new OS, I don’t
    | > | think it is unreasonable for them to expect it to work. At least be on
    | > | par with XP, or we had all hoped it would surpass XP. This does not
    seem
    | > | to be the case.
    | >
    | > I would not even consider an "upgrade" at this point. Will all new PCs
    | > come with Vista preloaded or will we get a choice to stick with XP?
    | >
    | > Maybe Apple or Linux will come up with a viable alternative.
    |
    |
    | SuSE 10.2 with Beryl. Runs rings around the "Aero" desktop!

    I have Ubuntu Linux 6.10 Edgy Eft on a Computer Shopper coverdisc.
    Is that as good as SuSE?
     
    Spencer ©¿©¬, Mar 24, 2007
    #4
  5. Dr. Bill

    Damian Guest

    Ask participants of the Special Olympics. XP and Vista groups wouldn't know
    as much as them about linux.
     
    Damian, Mar 24, 2007
    #5
  6. Dr. Bill

    Meat Plow Guest

    I've been test driving Kubuntu Edgy for a month or so and I'll vouch for
    its ease of use and stability. It's default environment is KDE 3.5.5
    however I run some Gnome apps in it like Pan and they work well.
    Have used SuSE in the past but I can't comment on the current release.
     
    Meat Plow, Mar 24, 2007
    #6
  7. Dr. Bill

    Moonbat Guest


    ubuuntu is REALLY easy to install and get running. But, with an ATi Video
    Card (Radeon 9550 based) I have been having a BITCH of a time getting the
    3D effects working. As a matter of fact, it was the Ubuntu 6.10 I blew off
    to install XP. Figured if I couldn't get the Whiz-Bang stuff running that
    I already have running on others, why bother?

    I have 7.0 running on a USB drive, and can't get that going either. For
    some reason, it doesn't support the ATi drivers as well as SuSE. I hear if
    you have an nVidia based card, the graphics are even better. More direct,
    where the ATi driver and X-Server use an overlay instead of direct 3D
    rendering. nVidia uses direct 3D, so EVERYTHING is accelerated. I can't
    even imagine it...even with the crippled ATi drivers, it's pretty cool.

    Multimedia may lag behind, definitely in SuSE, but Ubuntu seems to have
    done their homework here. SuSE is meant more for a business user who is
    primarily concerned with Networking; the reason I started with it was
    because it used all the flaky hardware I had on the machine I first
    installed it on. Loaded right off the bat. Ubuntu wasn't out then. But
    Ubuntu is aimed more at education and the home user, and seems to be a
    little more media oriented. One caveat: Flash doesn't have a 64-Bit Linux
    player, so anything in Flash (embedded videos and web sites) won't run on
    a 64 bit version. Install the 32 bit version and you won't have this
    problem.

    Have you tried it yet? I believe all ubuntu disks are "Live" disks,
    meaning you can boot from them and run them right from the CD/DVD. That
    way you can decide if you like it before you commit a HDD or a partition
    and then saying "Why the HECK did I install this?!?!" I did that with
    about 5 versions of Linux before I tried SuSE.

    And, SuSE has something called YaST (Yet another Set-up Tool) where all
    your system parameters are located in something similar to Control Panel.
    Makes it MUCH easier to configure your system; Ubuntu was supposed to
    borrow this from SuSE for 7.X, but it hasn't made it's appearance yet. I
    also have a flaky monitor; it's modes are weird, and it's not as readily
    configurable in Ubuntu as in SuSE. I had to edit the parameter file to get
    the resolution and refresh rates I needed to make it work properly.

    Like any Linux distro, there are good things and there are bad things with
    Ubuntu. Run the Live disk and see if you like it, but bear in mind you
    won't get the acceleration (most likely, that is) without installing it
    and fiddling with it.

    If you want to see what Beryl looks like, get a copy of Sabayon

    http://www.sabayonlinux.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=27

    and run the LIVE DVD first. It asks you if you want to turn on Desktop
    Effects when it loads, and it worked right off the bat with my hardware
    with no fiddling whatsoever. Likewise, you can install it or run it from
    the DVD. What I didn't like (in some ways, in some ways it's better...)
    was the fact that it is based on Gentoo, so installing (Emerge) software
    means downloading it and compiling it. This happens on the fly. It's not
    as fast as RPMs or DEBs (SuSE and Ubuntu) but you KNOW the software has
    been compiled specifically to run on your system!

    Sorry for being so long winded, but Linux is an entirely different world
    from Windows, with a lot of choices and settings for different purposes!
    It's not a One Solution Fits All, or as in the case of Vista, the more you
    pay, the more you get (um, not ALWAYS a Good Thing, as I found with Vista
    Ultimate...). Linux can always be had from someone, somewhere, for Free.
    Even Lindows or whatever it's called now (Um, Linspire...brain fart...)
    now has a free verson, but it doesn't like my video card/monitor
    combination at all!

    Good Luck! Linux isn't for everyone, but once (IF) you can get used to it,
    you can see how well thought out a lot of things are...and how some aren't!
    Some don't like it...it took me 4 years and about a dozen installs before
    I became accustomed to it! Now I love it, but it is still a Microsoft
    world...
     
    Moonbat, Mar 24, 2007
    #7
  8. Dr. Bill

    Moonbat Guest


    Nyaa..nyaa! I blew that away for my XP install, but have Feisty Fawn (7.0)
    running off a USB drive.

    Hardly any trouble at all, except for a screensaver 'upgrade' that crashes
    X when a GL ss is run. I can deal with that!
     
    Moonbat, Mar 24, 2007
    #8
  9. Dr. Bill

    Moonbat Guest


    Wanna bet? ;)
     
    Moonbat, Mar 24, 2007
    #9

  10. LOL. The regulars of this ng, such as Dr. Bill, hate Windows Vista.
    They detest Linux, it makes you stupid (rofl!). And Apple is for gays.
    So.. you guys have to stick to xp forever I guess! No alternative!
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
     
    George Orwell, Mar 26, 2007
    #10
  11. Dr. Bill

    Moonbat Guest


    Actually, that doesn't sound too bad.
    But I would have stuck with NT 4.0, myself...it was a great OS.
     
    Moonbat, Mar 27, 2007
    #11
  12. Dr. Bill

    Venom Guest

    Venom, Mar 27, 2007
    #12
  13. Dr. Bill

    Dr. Bill Guest

    Please explain when I said that I "hate" Vista?
    Your admission of a known fact is noted! and Linux is a toy for fat guys who
    live at home in their Mom's basement, like you!
    And queers!
    For the time being, yes! Most windows users skipped ME, remember!
    Not at all, there will be an alternative, Vista will be modified to run
    smoothly on most machines within a year.
     
    Dr. Bill, Mar 27, 2007
    #13
  14. Dr. Bill

    Venom Guest

    There is a remote chance the above could be true but only if Gates and his
    team of incompetents remove useless shit from Vista and don't try to pile
    more crap onto it. Unfortunately we know from history that this is never
    going to happen.
     
    Venom, Mar 27, 2007
    #14
  15. So.. Vista is according to you an OS to be skipped? It took Billy Boy
    about 5 years to develop this OS... so you have to wait another 5
    year?? lol!
    How optimistic.
     
    George Orwell, Mar 28, 2007
    #15
  16. Dr. Bill

    Damian Guest

    Are you new to Windows? Have you forgotten Windows 98 SE? Windows 2000 (or
    XP) SP1?
     
    Damian, Mar 28, 2007
    #16
  17. Dr. Bill

    Venom Guest

    I think so too.
    I recently recieved the DVD with Vista Starter on it too and seeing that I
    started with Ultimate and then Buisness and eventually Home Premium with not
    a lot of joy, I thought I would install this "Starter" version.
    Surely the lowest version of Vista should produce some encouraging results
    but it performs the same as the rest of the versions. Very discouraging.
    I was led to believe that this Starter version was meant for the Third World
    basic computers yada yada (reads bullshit), so I loaded it onto a just made
    redundant AthlonXP 2500 Barton powered machine with dual channel ram and a
    new but modest 64Mb ddr ram video card. Even this version is as slow as a
    wet week. On the other hand, XP Pro runs like a dream on this computer so
    something in Vista Starter is sure bogging it down. I get a rating of 1 with
    the hardware but this rating is pointing to my video card as everything else
    will give me enough to run Ultimate if I install an expensive ballsy video
    card.
    Something is very wrong with this picture and unfortunately I am not clever
    enough to know what it is but I feel very sure that Young Bill with
    thousands of experts, billions of dollars and 5 years could have done
    better.
    I can't help but think that Vista isn't really an Operating System but more
    a vehicle for Bill's dreams of what he thinks we want.
     
    Venom, Mar 28, 2007
    #17
  18. Dr. Bill

    Papageno Guest

    If you recall, similar complaints were lodged against NT and 98. The new OS
    was built to hog more resources, but the new computers had the resources, so
    no problem.

    As for those of you wishing to upgrade. Don't. MS won't care. Their main
    business is in new systems, where nearly all of the market is Windows.
    Plenty of sales there. And new computers sold with Windows are 100%
    licensed, virtually no piracy. Just the ticket for any OS vendor!

    Meanwhile, since it seems that Vista offers little of any real benefit over
    XP, I see little reason to upgrade. Get Vista with your next new computer in
    few years. Not before.
    They did just what they needed to. New computers will run Vista just fine.
    My first XP box had 256 MB. And the pre-SP versions could run "okay" (surf
    and mail) just fine on 128 MB. But new Vista computers start at 1 GB at the
    low end, and 2 GB is (or soon will be) the norm. Vista is just not meant for
    you (or me). At least not when using our old hardware.

    I really don't see this as being much different from previous new releases
    of Windows.
     
    Papageno, Mar 29, 2007
    #18
  19. Dr. Bill

    Venom Guest

    I beg to differ. There are a terrible lot of folk out there who simply can't
    afford a new super computer just to run Vista. By installing Vista Starter I
    thought this might run on weaker computers and give these people a break but
    I was wrong as the lowest form of Vista life still needs a super computer to
    run it even though it has jack shit in it. There are a lot of companies out
    there who are not real keen to upgrade or renew 1,000 computers just to run
    Vista either. One would have thought that Young Bill would have taken this
    into consideration but that seems not to be the case here. As you are no
    doubt aware, word spreads very quickly in the computer industry and there is
    not a single person in the world you can't hurt by hitting him in the
    wallet. Young Bill would love to have the world by the balls in as much as
    every computer sold would be a Microsoft "Special" but we all know that this
    is never going to happen as the average computer user is just not that
    stupid.
    Let's just sit back and see what happens eh?
     
    Venom, Mar 29, 2007
    #19
  20. Dr. Bill

    Papageno Guest

    Did you read what I wrote? I said that Vista was NOT designed for older
    computers, and you're NOT expected to install Vista on one of them, and
    there's really NO need to use Vista at all on any such computer.

    I would NOT expect Young (not anymore) Bill to make Vista run on old
    computers. But he did provide the Aero-free version anyway.
     
    Papageno, Mar 29, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.