This is where I post, and you can post too!
Was it worth it? Answer.... no
Published on January 24, 2008 By Dan Greene In OS Wars
First let me say I'm not joking when I say I'd love to reply to your posts, but I am seemingly unable to reply only edit the original post, does anybody have any suggestions, I'm using Vista lol and firefox. Is my brower missing the reply functionality?

I purchased an OEM copy of Vista, when I was given the dilemma by Microsoft of either purchasing a OEM XP License for about $10 less than getting an OEM copy of Vista via newegg.

What I can tell you is that I have been a computer user since the 80's and have a history of OS usage, dating back to whatever they called the OS on the Apple IIGS, DOS 5.0, Windows 3.1, Win 95/98/98SE/2000/XP and of course OEM VISTA ULTIMATE 64 bit.

I have finally settled down with Vista, but I am left looking for the new and improved features which really give me the feeling that they are all that (sorta) without the bag of chips.

I don't understand why Vista wasn't packaged as saleable service pack to XP because Vista truly offers an almost immeasurable benefit per dollar over XP.

One of the major downsides of Vista, is the necessity to upgrade hardware on older rigs to achieve performance standards easily obtainable with 2 or 3 or 4 year old hardware on XP. Also, with only 2GB of ram in the sytem, it is smooth, but it would be equally smooth with XP, so while there is intelligent (supposedly) buffering of the RAM by Vista, perhaps reducing the load time on programs you use consistently at certain times of the day, in Vista over XP I don't see that it is a major advantage over XP. I use XP at work daily, Windows 2000 weekly, and Vista at home.

At this point I am pretty comfy with Vista, I have totally disabled the UAC, and I am left to wonder if I am really safer with Vista vs XP. I did have a virus or nasty bit of malware at one time, with Vista, which I was able to safely dispose of using System Restore. On my old single core rig, System Restore no longer works for unknown reasoning, also I cannot reformat the drive, and install a clean OS, because I no longer have the activation code which I'll have to call up Dell TSupport and spend more hours of my life than it is worth to deal with that, while having a protected computer readily available should there be a problem.

However, with Vista Ultimate, no update to the speech recognition system, no word processor which interfaces with the speech recognition, and no real surviving feature that I get excited by.

At this point I would have preferred to get OEM XP and a cheap or bootleg copy of Office, just for the fact that I have spell check and compatibility with work computers, Excel files.

There are a few visual things but nothing to justify 5 years of development, nothing to justify the price, and certainly nothing to want me to invest any money in upcoming Windows 7 or go Microsoft in the future. Unfortunately they have damaged their company image, going from the evil almost monopoly to the exploiter of that power to release drab OS software that lacks completeness and robustness.

There is nothing that truly bothers me about Vista Ultimate, if you forget about, No MS WORD, No OS integrated Microsoft Virus Protection, and lack of incompatibility of the Vista Speech Recognition Engine with Open Office.

I believe that Vista, really does deserve the half assed product award. At this point.



How does one make a reply in ones' own post? JU must have changed since I was last here since I can no longer reply to users in the forum which is kinda stupid in my opinion.

Comments (Page 2)
9 Pages1 2 3 4  Last
on Jan 25, 2008
Updating hardware is a requirement for every new operating system unless you want a slow system. Why don't the naysayers save all your comments in a folder so you can bust em out 5 years from now, and then 10 years from now, and then 15 years from now. Heck, if you save all your camments you'll never have to form an original thought again.
on Jan 25, 2008


starting to bite took awhile
on Jan 25, 2008
i am THE exception to many rules but not when it comes to liking vista, i assure you. everyone one of us had to upgrade our rigs when we went from 98, me, or 2000 to xp, didn't we? fortunately, i already had a rig capable of running vista when it was released and didn't need to upgrade this time. i must admit trying to run vista with only 512 megs of ram won't work. i tell everyone i build vista rigs for that they must have at least 2 gigs of ram or they'll regret it. i may only build 3 to 4 rigs a week on average but 75% of those rigs have vista when they are delivered and i've never had one person ask to have vista removed and replaced with xp. i'd do if asked but nobody has asked.
on Jan 25, 2008
OK guys - suffice it to say that around here word on the street is that Vista sucks. At work we sell more XP boxes than Vista boxes. I have people telling me how bad Vista is.

And by the way why should I upgrade my box just to run Vista? I personally don't like Vista. I'm happy with XP.

Phoon - backoff...
on Jan 25, 2008
count me in as another exception

Vista is not bad preinstalled on my new laptop

on Jan 25, 2008
Phoon - backoff...




from what?. sounds like your just trying to start a shitfight
on Jan 25, 2008
And by the way why should I upgrade my box just to run Vista? I personally don't like Vista. I'm happy with XP.

Then stop complaining and bad-mouthing it like your word is gospel and true for EVERYONE who has ever used it. I have Vista Home Premium on a new laptop and have no complaints.

As for your complaint about having to upgrade...welcome to new technology. That's how it works. Your system is antiquated and slow, of course it's not gonna be able to run the latest and greatest. I might as well complain about HD DVD and BLU-Ray and say they suck simply because I can't afford to get a player to play them, same thing you're doing.
on Jan 25, 2008

what did phoon do other than being a big dummy hoosier?    

 

that bebi gal may be a hottie but she's darn good, too!

on Jan 25, 2008
In Soviet Russia , kona complains .. oh wait that's here too
on Jan 25, 2008
Phoon - backoff...


S'okay all,
Kona seems to think that every time someone makes a valid point against his "technical expertise" and "experience" that it is a personal attack on him. Some of the staff here think I'm an antagonist that is incapable of forming original thoughts too.

I might as well just disappear for awhile...
on Jan 25, 2008
I might as well just disappear for awhile...

No need for that.
on Jan 25, 2008
You want voice recog. with Vista - try this product and it will work for you better.
Vista only does what it is made to do to bring in the idea for this. This program completes the idea.
WWW Link

SGT  
on Jan 26, 2008
Your system is antiquated and slow


How do you figure? It's not dual core but it still gets a 3.0 for Vista's scores...

Phoon - my apologies...
on Jan 26, 2008
Most new systems come with 1gb standard at least, 512mb is pitiful, XP barely runs on that. Dual-core is also the new standard. If you're so adamantly satisfied with your system, why do you keep bashing Vista for not running at the optimum on it? Surely it's not Vista's fault that your machine isn't up to the new standards. I'm not gonna bash movie studios for putting out widescreen movies when I only have a standard TV and they aren't optimized for it. And going with that reasnoning...that doesn't mean widescreen dvd's suck because they aren't optimized on standard TV's, widescreen is the only way to go.
on Jan 26, 2008
Most new systems come with 1gb standard at least, 512mb is pitiful, XP barely runs on that.


Wrong. MS recommends 256 for XP and it runs great with 512.

If you're so adamantly satisfied with your system, why do you keep bashing Vista for not running at the optimum on it?


Because MS should realize that people shouldn't have to upgrade parts every other day just to run a OS that is half baked...

XP will run good on the old 1 GHz P3 systems. Why should we as a whole have to give the hardware boys more cash just to satisfy Vista's requirements? MS should have made Vista less hardware intensive so it will run on the systems most people have. I know many people who will not get a new PC nor upgrade the one they have to run Vista. They like XP and see no reason to spoend more money.

You guys can run your Vista rigs. I don't care.
9 Pages1 2 3 4  Last