Why, Exactly, Does Everyone "Hate" Vista?

[Dzomlija]

If u dl every single patch update it adds up to over 6 gigs or atleast mine did. It didn't work out of the box. I using your method of a car to say the flaws and how some return policy has been set for buggy cars y not buggy OS because ur talking about new cars with getting service I am just stating well cars have rules and regulations to cover their flaws..

You didn'y hapen to download the optional language packs also? Thats was a bit of a waste, so I opted to have those hidden...

There are several reasons for not implementing some sort of returns policy for an operating system and all other software, in general. Not the least of which is piracy. It may be different in your country, but here in South Africa, any kind of software can be returned for a refund only if the original packaging has not been opened. If the package is opened, it can be exchanged only only for the identical product. Most retailers have signs in their stores that state the buyer must "ensure compatibility with your computer system before you purchase software".

Then there is also user error. Let's be honest here, shall we? As much as we'd like to believe otherwise, there are those people out there that don't know the difference between a bit and a byte on a computer, and when they do something that should not have been done, then they think the computer is broken. Many of these people flood the support channels with rubbish, and if there was a returns policy on software, it would be even worse.

Sometimes problems with an OS is not caused by the OS. Have you ever installed a buggy driver that wreaked havoc with the system? Who to you blame there and who do you goto for a refund? Or what about an incorrect setting that also caused problems?

Then there are also a plethora of hardware vendors that are indifferent to what that do provide and what should be provided! If you where budget conscious, what would you choose - A computer that costs R 3500 (approx $ 350) or one that costs R 10000 ($1500)? Many computer retailers jump on the opportunity to sell a cheap, inadequate POS to a complete novice, where instead they should have allowed the novie the choice by informing him/her of what the differences are in performance, and what the two different machines are capable of. In most cases, they just dump the POS on the unsuspecting user without giving them the choice. And then the software this user wants to run doesn't work properly at all because the computer is a POS. Who do you blame? The software vendor? The hardware vendor? Or the company that sold the computer in the first place?

These are just some of the issues that plague the implementation of a returns-policy for software. It not always the fault of the software is the point I'm trying to make.

I said OS in general not in terms of just vista, also y i added online games It was a general blanket statement. how do they make money from free updates you ask? Its not making money from the update its making the profit from selling the OS. U sell the OS then you have funding to go back over and develop patches. If you don't want to spend the money or resources to develop it now sell what you have and finish the rest with the money you bring in. A lot of companies do it. Lately I think the PC world in general has been slacking because of the internet and making far to many patches instead of spending the basic funding to make it work completely out of the box.

It can't be easy to release a new product, whether it's an OS, productivity software or a game. If any vendor where to take the time needed to relase software without any bugs at all, then they will loose out completely. This is why there are BETA programs, so that they can determine the level of quality that their product has, and to get an opportunity to discover that most critical bugs before they do release to market. It's about finding a balance.

And lets be honest here. No matter how stable the software is out of the box, it's not possible to release something that is 100% bug free. Someone will experience a problem out of the box, and still others will find some rather creative ways of bringing the software to its knees. Some bugs can or will only be discovered after an RTM release, and this is why we have automatic update facilities to fix those bugs.

My pc far exceeded what was needed to run vista. and it was from a Clean Blank HD nothing was on it. I put it together myself. After uninstalling vista and going back to XP i did notice one thing I even unpartitioned the drive in the XP set up and formated it. But then after the settings where finished I noticed 21 gigs of my HD was missing not showing up on a partion it just showed my drive as 21 gigs less. After reinstalling vista I then noticed that was apart of the vista install. And it some how stored stuff on my HDD because when I reinstalled vista some of my previous where still there. So something tells me xp/vista aren't completely letting you clear each other.

Genrally re-partitioning or formatting a drive will wipe everything. The differences in space that you have noticed betwen a Vista and XP install could be attributed to any number of things, not the least of which are whatever settings you have enabled both during and after the installation process. The size of your swap file, for one. Indexing, Volume Shadow Copies and System Restore also comes to mind. And then don't forget that Vista is larger than XP, so even a clean install will use up a little more space on the hard disk.

Ok, so it's been nearly a year since I installed Vista, so this number may not be accurate, but I've just checked the size of the Vista "C:\Windows" folder. It is currently at 13.9 GB. I run Windows XP in a virtual machine (I am a software developer, and use it for cross-platform software testing). The size of the Windows folder for XP with SP2 is only 1.62 GB, including updates that have been done.

The differences come in because of the way Vista installs itself. You very rarely (if ever) need to use the DVD to install a previously unavailable feature because the entire installation base is copied to the harddrive for future use. Xp didn't do that. Maybe one of the MVPs (Brink, Andre?) can explain this one better than I can.

 

[sooner1938]

Apparently other forums are getting the same complaints about Vista as this one. Note, Pete, that on this website there's only one poster who has anything good to say about the OS. In fact, he sounds about like you.

Wonder if there's anything to the claim (on the linked website) that MS has agreed to let OEMs permit customers to downgrade to XP? That would be an interesting development and would definitely be an acknowledgement by MS that their new OS leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Dzomlija]

Apparently other forums are getting the same complaints about Vista as this one. Note, Pete, that on this website there's only one poster who has anything good to say about the OS. In fact, he sounds about like you.

Wonder if there's anything to the claim (on the linked website) that MS has agreed to let OEMs permit customers to downgrade to XP? That would be an interesting development and would definitely be an acknowledgement by MS that their new OS leaves a lot to be desired.

Actually, the claim that Microsoft is allowing OEMs to let their customer downgrade to XP is very much real, but it remains a choice of the OEM whether to implement such a downgrade option or not. Here, in South Africa, all major OEM suppliers have not chosen to do that.

If you purchase a computer preloaded with Vista, you get Vista. If, however, you purchase the components to build your own, then, and only then, do you get the choice of whether you want to use XP or Vista. And also only while stocks last for XP OEM Media. And their invoice/quotes clearly state that Vista is the recommended OS of choice.

I wouldn't hazard a gues as to how companies in the USA are dealing with it...

 

[sooner1938]

If you purchase a computer preloaded with Vista, you get Vista. If, however, you purchase the components to build your own, then, and only then, do you get the choice of whether you want to use XP or Vista. And also only while stocks last for XP OEM Media. And their invoice/quotes clearly state that Vista is the recommended OS of choice.

I wouldn't hazard a gues as to how companies in the USA are dealing with it...

As I said earlier, all of Dell's advertising brochures trumpet that "Dell recommends Vista Home Premium" but on their website, it's possible to still buy machines with XP pre-installed. However, it's only offered in the "small business" desktop line.

When I decided to buy a new computer, I gave a lot of thought to buying one of those "small business" desktops with XP but figured that support for the OS would eventually be phased out by both MS and the OEM, leaving folks with the XP machines high and dry.

I guess MS and/or the OEMs will eventually come up with fixes for the problems currently plaguing Vista - just hope they don't take too long doing it or they're gonna have a lot of very unhappy people out here.

 

[Dzomlija]

I guess MS and/or the OEMs will eventually come up with fixes for the problems currently plaguing Vista - just hope they don't take too long doing it or they're gonna have a lot of very unhappy people out here.

The only real problems I've experienced with Vista on OEM built computers is that the hardware is usually woefully under specced (2.8GHz CPU, 512MB Ram, onboard display, etc). This is an unfortunate common practice, and one of the real reason why I just do not purchase fully built OEM branded computers.

Sure, not everyone has sufficient knowledge to be able to build their own computers. What I usually do for my customers in such a case is I try to determine what their needs are (Business, Multimedia, Gaming, Internet/e-Mail, or a variation). From there, I choose motherboard, display, chassis, etc, and I build the computer for them. And to date, out of the approx 1200 Vista computers I've sold in the past year, I've maybe had about 15 comebacks because of faulty hardware. Nothing to do with Vista.

But that's just my own experience...

 

[sooner1938]

I've given passing thought to maybe one day trying to build a computer. I've even salvaged and stored one or two of the towers from old desktops, thinking that I might could buy the innards and install them into the towers. But I probably never will as, first of all, I harbor inner doubts that my technical ability extends that far and secondly, the price has fallen so far on them in the states that for me, it's just easier buying one built by people who know more about the subject than I do.

 

[Eviljello]

Vista pulled 21 gigs I never said this was all used towards it but it was 21 gigs missing that didn't return. Formating should fully wipe a hard drive my complaint is y didn't it? I lost to much space for it to go and just repair.. Kinda like the problem with ppl using FAT Hard drives and having to installs i think it was windows 95/98 just to do a format because xp couldn't do it.. Microsoft cuts alot of corners.

My pc being custom built with supposed vista certified stuff should have worked out of the box because of the beta testing. But ofcourse it didn't. I know after fully patching everything I found I finally got it to run so I am going to say Microsoft went back over and fixed it. I have been running vista most of the week its not to bad after all the patches but they do alot of shady stuff. Like my hard drive space missing or alot of the background services just being active GOD i hated disabling them. It was such a waste to have most of them even there.

Its due to the beta they shouldn't have had so many problems out of the box but they did y? It was rushed. Saying a bug here or there is one thing but geeze man look around at other forums and reviews.. People are getting pissed left and right. because of the bugs. What kinda beta did they really run if nothing seemed to work. I know its hard for you to pull urself back but your just one of what i can see is a slim few that got vista to run out of the box. Look at how many ppl that couldn't get it to run.

Another BIG issue i had was with the ninja update Microsoft did that brought half of my professors and my college mates pcs down at the time. You know when it deleted any non approved Microsoft .dll. So pretty much all their PCs became useless until they had the time to re installs about 6 hours of software because Vista thought it was being smart and deleting stuff. Vista is great for general users the average John that pulls stuff of the shelves and it could even work in corporate world with the right support. But most ppl one these forums are high end power users we custom built our machines and run alot of different stuff. I have tons of Programming software and other such programs where if I had an update delete my .dll files I would be down from work for at least 3 days. Its those mistakes that Cost Microsoft and should be avoided but doesn't seem like they are trying to.

 

[larryk]

IMO, Vista is XP SP3 with a fancy - and very hungry - UI and limited backwards compatibility. I have and will defend Windows and Microsoft when arguments are based on speculation or simple-minded Microsoft-bashing, but there really isn't much added value in this OS for me. That's just my experience.

My Vista box has been demoted to gamer rig and my Mac has been restored as my primary machine (with XP running in a Parallels VM for those pesky Windows only apps that my acquaintances insist on using and Microsoft Money).

I think the bottom line is that each of us has specific needs/desires when it comes to computing and will use whatever best meets our preferences (sometimes to the detriment of our needs). Why anyone would waste the energy to hate a software company is beyond me.

 

[Eviljello]

its fun to hate

 

[sooner1938]

Why anyone would waste the energy to hate a software company is beyond me.

Microsoft isn't just a software company, as you put it, Larry. Gates's creation powers most of the world's computers and as you know, most of the advanced countries of the world have become extremely dependent on computers. Therefore, if those computers don't work properly (or at least in a manner than the operators understand) we're in big trouble.

 

[larryk]

Microsoft isn't just a software company, as you put it, Larry.

Isn't it though? I don't have precise statistics on OS usage worldwide, but I hesitate to assume that a majority of critical infrastructure is dependant on the latest flavor of Windows. Companies with which I am familiar spend years in testing and proving OS upgrades. I currently work at a nuclear generating station where our IT department is still slow to release Win2K patches. I would guess that a majority of Vista installations reside on computer-appliances used by individuals for email and web or in software development environments. Working in the computer industry for the last 10 years - mostly on the application side, it has been my experience that many critical systems are unix/linux-based and that trend appears steady if not increasing.

Regardless, hating a company - even a dominant one - seems a fruitless use of energy to me. There are options, and the more the options are exercised, the better the option will become.

 

[Dzomlija]

Another BIG issue i had was with the ninja update Microsoft did that brought half of my professors and my college mates pcs down at the time. You know when it deleted any non approved Microsoft .dll. So pretty much all their PCs became useless until they had the time to re installs about 6 hours of software because Vista thought it was being smart and deleting stuff. Vista is great for general users the average John that pulls stuff of the shelves and it could even work in corporate world with the right support. But most ppl one these forums are high end power users we custom built our machines and run alot of different stuff. I have tons of Programming software and other such programs where if I had an update delete my .dll files I would be down from work for at least 3 days. Its those mistakes that Cost Microsoft and should be avoided but doesn't seem like they are trying to.

Pretty much anything and everything you install that is not part of the OS is "not an approved microsoft .dll"! I have NEVER heard of an update that does this, nor have I experienced it, and my Automatic Updates is set to check every day for updates! Which update did this?

The only conclusion is that that some form of virus or malware got into the system, andthat delted the files you speak of. No-one, not even microsoft, will commit market suicide by releasing un update that deltes third-party dlls!

 

[Eviljello]

it was one that hit last year. apart of their first updates it never truly hit the media but alot of pcs got affected by it. I will try to find the exact update. I know a few cycles of it went out then they pulled it back before it got all pcs and quick patched from there but yes it did happen and thats why alot of people feared even touching it at my college.

 

[sooner1938]

Isn't it though? I don't have precise statistics on OS usage worldwide, but I hesitate to assume that a majority of critical infrastructure is dependant on the latest flavor of Windows. Companies with which I am familiar spend years in testing and proving OS upgrades. I currently work at a nuclear generating station where our IT department is still slow to release Win2K patches. I would guess that a majority of Vista installations reside on computer-appliances used by individuals for email and web or in software development environments. Working in the computer industry for the last 10 years - mostly on the application side, it has been my experience that many critical systems are unix/linux-based and that trend appears steady if not increasing.

I googled on "computer usage+statistics" and came up with several hits. This one looked promising but I found no hard figures even on their home page. But I'd bet money that Microsoft's OS use is in the 85/90 percent range.

But you're right - hating Microsoft is an exercise in futility.

 

[larryk]

But I'd bet money that Microsoft's OS use is in the 85/90 percent range.

I wouldn't argue that figure for the private sector or even commercial workstations, but the computer infrastructure that we have become so dependent on, I'm guessing, the percentage is not quite so high. Unix was the early multi-node OS and probably still dominates behind the scenes. I guess what I'm trying to say - and struggling to do so - is that even a total bomb Windows build (and I don't classify Vista that way) won't bring information age Armageddon.

 

[sooner1938]

I wouldn't argue that figure for the private sector or even commercial workstations, but the computer infrastructure that we have become so dependent on, I'm guessing, the percentage is not quite so high. Unix was the early multi-node OS and probably still dominates behind the scenes. I guess what I'm trying to say - and struggling to do so - is that even a total bomb Windows build (and I don't classify Vista that way) won't bring information age Armageddon.

IMO, Larry, you're speaking as someone who works in the IT field. Maybe the programmers and analysts who earn their keep working in the field are not so dependent on MS product but I'm sure the so-called geeks are a very small percentage of computer users. I imagine a large majority of users are folks just like me. Hell, I know scores, if not hundreds, of people who use computers every single day and who are not IT professionals. We don't know what makes 'em tick but we know the basics and we're the kind of people who keep the professionals working at turning out the hardware and software.

 

[larryk]

I imagine a large majority of users are folks just like me.

We agree. And for the basic appliance-computer user (email, web, etc.), it's my opinion that Mac offers a superior product. Even some Linux distributions are approaching mainstream ease of use. For gamers, the option is just as clear in favor of Windows as the most popular games and hardware run on Windows only.

Again, I just don't understand the feelings Microsoft brings out in people. Buy a Mac. Get a Dell with a Linux distribution. Or use Windows. Just chill about it.

 

[larryk]

For your anti-Vistite viewing pleasure.

http://www.theblimp.blip.tv/scripts...theblimp.blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf

 

[sooner1938]

I don't "hate" either Vista or Microsoft. But I am disappointed that a company with their resources, knowledge and experience can't turn out a better product.

And why is it that they have to foist new operating systems on the public every 4 or 5 years? Why can't they give us a good, stable system that does what its advertised to do and that protects consumers from the hackers?

You know if MS was doing their job properly, they could put companies like Symantec, McAfee and the others out of business because we'd no longer need malware protection.

 

[Dzomlija]

And why is it that they have to foist new operating systems on the public every 4 or 5 years? Why can't they give us a good, stable system that does what its advertised to do and that protects consumers from the hackers?

You've answered your own question! It's because of the hackers that Microsoft (and Apple) have to "foist" a new OS on us every couple years or so.

It a sort of oneupmanship. Microsft increases security. Hackers break security. Microsoft releases tighter security. Hackers break the tighter security. Ad Infinitum...

It's a vicious cycle, and we consumers are caught right in the middle!