Vista= Windows ME2

[Darktongue]

Seriously how can you guys handle sticking with this pos system? its got some nice looks and ideas ( well not really ideas more of stolen ideas from Mac) but really it isnt enough .
Constant crashes in games, drivers going boom, unexplained errors, printer spool trying to print to no printer and crashin system, the lists endless!

I know some will say stick with it and try patching gamess, get new drivers and you'll miss out on dx10 but who the F' cares? dx10= 5 games right now i think . Lotro has it and its isn beta and shows no difference. Crysis , shown to be same in dx9 except the dof thing. Hellgate? boomboomboomboom driver failure all day and its not funny.
I mean i cant even sit here on a forum and tpye without random dinwos poppin up to the bottom right saying " vista is a stroppy girl today and will try and fix this problem if it can be arsed" WHAT problem??


Id rather go back to win95 tbh lol. this is one horrendous operating system that should still be in beta BIGTIME!.

 

[Dzomlija]

Seriously how can you guys handle sticking with this pos system? its got some nice looks and ideas ( well not really ideas more of stolen ideas from Mac) but really it isnt enough .
Constant crashes in games, drivers going boom, unexplained errors, printer spool trying to print to no printer and crashin system, the lists endless!

I know some will say stick with it and try patching gamess, get new drivers and you'll miss out on dx10 but who the F' cares? dx10= 5 games right now i think . Lotro has it and its isn beta and shows no difference. Crysis , shown to be same in dx9 except the dof thing. Hellgate? boomboomboomboom driver failure all day and its not funny.
I mean i cant even sit here on a forum and tpye without random dinwos poppin up to the bottom right saying " vista is a stroppy girl today and will try and fix this problem if it can be arsed" WHAT problem??


Id rather go back to win95 tbh lol. this is one horrendous operating system that should still be in beta BIGTIME!.

Why do you bother posting if you already know the answer? Windows Vista has improved much over the past 12 months, and it appears that you have not yet appropriately updated the system, which include Windows Updates and drivers.

Could you relay the detailed specs of your machine?

Providing EXACT error messages will also help us find a solution for you. Unless of course your "vista is a stroppy girl today ..." is what you're seeing. This would indicate that the problem is not with Vista as you claim, but with a malware infection.

And before you fly off your bicycle against me, you may want to have a look at this article, which pretty much closes the argument about Vista vs Mac, with Vista being the winner in terms of reliability and performance:

Mac versus Windows vulnerability stats for 2007

And for the record, I agree with your assesment that Vista is the next Windows ME. Until Windows Vista, I considered Window ME to be the most reliable consumer version of Windows ever.

 

[vicar]

Hi dzomlija, your hard drives needs dusting, but you have a nice rig.

 

[Thanatos420]

I have had ZERO problems with Vista. I had an issue, but it turns out it was a DOA hard drive. This has been the most stable version of Windows I've had the pleasure to work with. I love it, and a lot of people (with the correct hardware and ability) love it as well.

 

[SilverWS602]

It's funny, because the only crash I've had on Vista was uguru.sys --- and that was because *I* installed the wrong version of the driver. Its been a solid 8 months now, no crashes. Damn this OS and its incompatability and unstableness!

 

[Archpope]

I'm older than some of the noobs on this forum, and I remember one particular summer when Microsoft put out a shiny new OS. They said it was going to be the most stable version of Windows EVER, with all sorts of new eye candy and security features. But, I also remember a lot of people fussing and moaning that they have to get updates from the companies that made their software, because THIS version of Windows used an all new kernel, and no one was ready for it. Also, it was nearly 10x bigger than the last version of Windows. Some people were going to have to buy new hardware just to run this bloated monster, and new software it had big-time compatibility issues.
What version of Windows was that again?

Oh yeah. Windows XP.

Now, since I am so much older than the noobs, I might be out of touch with the scene a little bit. People ARE still saying that about Windows XP, aren't they? It's still considered a bloated monster with a legion of incompatibilities, right? Best to stick with Windows 98 then. Plenty of software available for it, such as Office 97, Photoshop 5, and fantastic games like DOOM, the game that's in 3D (kinda)! Why would you upgrade?

 

[rajinisback]

Yes, I will stick with Vista. I been using X64 Ultimate for over 2 months and not one freakin issue. With proper planning/deployment I am happy with my Vista purchase. I don't even have heavy duty hardware and have a 3.3 Windows Rating. I did however build my own machine.

I do understand the fustration from people that purchased new computer from a brand name vendor (dell, compaq,hp, gateway) which has Vista loaded on it.
Home users (IMO) get raped by these companies bad for couple reasons.
1) Not enough memory for a smooth/quick reation time from Vista.
2) Their computers come preloaded with tons of bloatware that the user does not need.

I......HATE these companies for these reasons.

Raj

 

[larryk]

And before you fly off your bicycle against me, you may want to have a look at this article, which pretty much closes the argument about Vista vs Mac, with Vista being the winner in terms of reliability and performance:

With all due respect dz, did you mean to link a security vulnerability assessment to Mac's "reliability and performance"? It doesn't do much to support your assertion.

Did you read this line: "The lone Defender critical vulnerability that was supposed to defend Windows Vista was ironically the first critical vulnerability for Windows Vista." Vista's OS-integrated Defender is a critical vulnerability? You just can't make stuff like that up.

I skimmed the list of "vulnerabilities," and Mac's list contained a lot of obscure stuff. Not that I condone these oversights by Apple, just that at least a part of the OS isn't its own worst enemy... And a lot of the fixes are single fixes that span multiple apps counted multiple times. Not totally unfair, just keep that in mind. Believe me, I watch as updates come for both my Mac and Vista machines.

As a Wintel user for most of my computing life, and a Mac convert for a few years. And one who gave Vista a fair chance - and I didn't see the tons of errors that some people are reporting - let me assure you, in my side by side experience - Mac is a superior operating system in every aspect except industry favor (which admittedly is a huge plus and why I maintain a Windows computer and run XP in a VM on my Mac).

Please don't get hostile, just trying to offer my opinion and experience.

 

[rajinisback]

I wonder...if Mac is so much better..why is it not top dog in world class enterprises and home users or is it?

 

[Dzomlija]

Hi dzomlija, your hard drives needs dusting, but you have a nice rig.

yeah, I know but the area where I live makes the job difficult. I dust out with a blower about every 2 months or so.

 

[Dzomlija]

And before you fly off your bicycle against me, you may want to have a look at this article, which pretty much closes the argument about Vista vs Mac, with Vista being the winner in terms of reliability and performance:

With all due respect dz, did you mean to link a security vulnerability assessment to Mac's "reliability and performance"? It doesn't do much to support your assertion.

Did you read this line: "The lone Defender critical vulnerability that was supposed to defend Windows Vista was ironically the first critical vulnerability for Windows Vista." Vista's OS-integrated Defender is a critical vulnerability? You just can't make stuff like that up.

I skimmed the list of "vulnerabilities," and Mac's list contained a lot of obscure stuff. Not that I condone these oversights by Apple, just that at least a part of the OS isn't its own worst enemy... And a lot of the fixes are single fixes that span multiple apps counted multiple times. Not totally unfair, just keep that in mind. Believe me, I watch as updates come for both my Mac and Vista machines.

As a Wintel user for most of my computing life, and a Mac convert for a few years. And one who gave Vista a fair chance - and I didn't see the tons of errors that some people are reporting - let me assure you, in my side by side experience - Mac is a superior operating system in every aspect except industry favor (which admittedly is a huge plus and why I maintain a Windows computer and run XP in a VM on my Mac).

Please don't get hostile, just trying to offer my opinion and experience.

My apologies if I sounded hostile. That was not my intention. It's just that having been on this NG for several months now, I'm getting a little tired of the trolls saying Mac is better than Windows and then offering little to no evidence to backup their claims. Stick around a little longer, and you'll begin to see what I mean.

I'm not going dis either OS, as each does have their own merits. I posted that link detailing the high imbalance of flaws and patches between the two because I believe that the security of an operating system contributes greatly to its performance and reliability.

Although never having used a Mac for my own work (Macs are just too damned expensive here in South Africa for most users), I've come to realize that just as many users have converted from Mac to Windows as have Windows users converted to Mac. The whole debacle started when Apple started caring more about outdoing Microsoft, and vice versa.

I still think that Microsoft is the better choice, but thats my own opinion.

 

[roy69]

Sounds like vista user 43 to me, slags of an os without any real points. Vista does have a couple of problems, if the developers write proper drivers for their hardware that is compatable with vista there will not be as many bsod or other errors. Is this microsofts fault, no. If the consumer that build rigs does a bit of digging into what works with vista and what drivers are available before building a rig they wont get any problems. Again this is not microsofts fault. If the game developer wrote code that would work with the os and the drivers available there would again be less crashes. This is not microsofts fault. If the consumer stopped trying to vista bash and sort out there system, they would have a better time of it.

 

[larryk]

I wonder...if Mac is so much better..why is it not top dog in world class enterprises and home users or is it?

Quite simple, really. Microsoft made better business decisions early in the game. Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better...nor does the status quo.

 

[larryk]

My apologies if I sounded hostile. That was not my intention. It's just that having been on this NG for several months now, I'm getting a little tired of the trolls saying Mac is better than Windows and then offering little to no evidence to backup their claims.

No worries, I've been a round for a bit too and have seen how you've laid into some would-be Microsoft bashers. I just didn't want you to think that's what I was doing, as you can see by my other posts, I'm not like that.

I don't see a lot of evidence being presented on the MS side either. When I have more time, I will list why I prefer Mac to Windows, though by your own admission, you cannot do the same.

Although never having used a Mac for my own work

I'm not going dis either OS, as each does have their own merits. I posted that link detailing the high imbalance of flaws and patches between the two because I believe that the security of an operating system contributes greatly to its performance and reliability.

We have different definitions then. When I think of performance, I think of speed mostly, the ability to run modern apps with reasonable ease. When I think of reliability, I think of crashing, hanging, compatibility. When I think of security, I think of vulnerability to malicious attack - something a whole lot more prevalent with Windows by the way. So I don't lump security in with the others.

I've come to realize that just as many users have converted from Mac to Windows as have Windows users converted to Mac. The whole debacle started when Apple started caring more about outdoing Microsoft, and vice versa.

Most of the time, Microsoft zealots have never used a Mac. On the other hand, if they work, most Mac zealots have used MS. I think this is an important element of the debate. I'm not sure where you get your numbers on converts, but my experience does not agree with yours.

Businesses will always be trying to outdo one another, that's the nature of business.

I still think that Microsoft is the better choice, but thats my own opinion.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion and are free to choose the OS of your liking. But have you really chosen, or have you simply acquired a taste for the dominant?

 

[larryk]

By the way, I understand the inference of calling Vista ME2, but I prefer my earlier appraisal of XP SP3.

 

[larryk]

Sounds like vista user 43 to me, slags of an os without any real points. Vista does have a couple of problems, if the developers write proper drivers for their hardware that is compatable with vista there will not be as many bsod or other errors. Is this microsofts fault, no. If the consumer that build rigs does a bit of digging into what works with vista and what drivers are available before building a rig they wont get any problems. Again this is not microsofts fault. If the game developer wrote code that would work with the os and the drivers available there would again be less crashes. This is not microsofts fault. If the consumer stopped trying to vista bash and sort out there system, they would have a better time of it.

Following this logic to conclusion, the lack of software for Mac is not a drawback to the OS. I disagree.

 

[Darktongue]

OK for one i own both pcs and macs. I use Macs for the art side and for notebook. PC is better for games and casual stuff ,yes it can do the *arty* side as well but old habits. Now if i take my last Mac purchase ,my MacBook, its crashed a total of ONCE. In 15 months of heavy use and by that i mean installing unintalling the works. Everything i do with pcs.
Now vista ive crashed so many times i cannot count. Specs? oh yeah they are so bizzarre i understand why MS couldnt be expected to know;

Gigabyte P35C-DS3R M/b
Quad Q6600 @2.4 (non oc)
OCZ DDR2 6400 , 4 gig (2x2 sticks)
nVidia 8800GTX 768mb (non OC)
Onboard HD Realtek sound
iiyama 22 LCD
generic dvd writer


bizzare stuff eh? ALL latest drivers , everything is up to date. Windows updates ALL done. Everything. Didnt do RC1 for Vista as its ...well...RC1 and not *gold*.

I never mentioned Macs being more reliable btw just that everything i like in Vista is already in OS X. From the gadgets to the screensavers it looks like Mac, which is fine but i can get that on my Mac without crashing everytime I launch a game .

A poster mentioned XP being buggy at launch etc.Yeah How olds Vista now? Would you buy a TV that switched off randomly if you watched the wrong channel randomly picked each day, for a year without expecting it to be fixed?? Software hardware, i make no diferentiation. It should work after so long.

My systems are always stable , i have been doing this since 1978 and so far MS hold the record for buggy OPs handsdown. Yeah lots of hardware to write for but when ATI and Nvidia BOTH agree they have a problem writting drivers for vista and dx10 ,then somethings wrong lol.

Roy69 it IS microsfts fault THEIR software doesnt work on so many systems without problems. My new system runs XP flawlessly.Every game i throw at it runs. I can even for example run Hellgate AND Tabula Rasa at same time without problems.Can i even stay onoine with Hellgate for 5 minutes in vista? Nope.Therefor its MS not me that has the faults.

Google vista problems and see how many dedicated sites there are like this .Most are full of people crying out for stable drivers after a year lol.

Sorry if this started an old argument again but last night i was at the end of 10 days of crashes and trying to stop them in vista. Id reinstalled , reformatted, everything and yet it always had problems , and sometime with different software each time.

I mean really you just sit at the desk , and Vista suddenly says "I can fix that problem click here" wtf i had no problem i was just sitting lol.

I eagerly await a proper fix to the stablity of Vista because i like the look and feel of it ,being so Mac like etc, and didnt want to stick with xp on my new comp.Afterall ive not got access to only 3.5gb and not the 4


Oh and the OP of choice has to be Workbench

 

[roy69]

I was not talking about the lack of software for the mac being a drawback, simply that not all of vistas problems are microsofts fault.

 

[JaxMacFL]

Usually the majority of pc problems can be traced to a short between the keyboard and the chair at the computer.

 

[larryk]

I was not talking about the lack of software for the mac being a drawback, simply that not all of vistas problems are microsofts fault.

Sorry Roy, I guess I wasn't very clear in my thought.

Your logic implies that because the rest of the computer world wasn't quite ready, Microsoft should not be accountable for instability introduced by immature drivers/apps and therefore it should not reflect negatively on the viability of the operating system. Moving that thought to Mac, should it not be unfavorable that there is a LACK of apps for OS X? IMHO, it is.